On Thu, Apr 10, 2014 at 08:05:11PM -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 10, 2014 at 07:58:55PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> > Bruce Momjian writes:
> > > It also has changed the OID status to only display if it exists. One
> > > question that came up with Robert is whether OID status should appe
On Thu, Apr 10, 2014 at 07:58:55PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Bruce Momjian writes:
> > It also has changed the OID status to only display if it exists. One
> > question that came up with Robert is whether OID status should appear
> > for \d as well, now that is only shows up when present.
>
> Yea
Bruce Momjian writes:
> It also has changed the OID status to only display if it exists. One
> question that came up with Robert is whether OID status should appear
> for \d as well, now that is only shows up when present.
Yeah, I was wondering about that too. If part of the argument here is
to
On Thu, Apr 10, 2014 at 01:10:35PM -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 10, 2014 at 01:05:32PM -0400, Greg Stark wrote:
> > If it's conditional I think "when it matches a guc" is too hard for users to
> > use.
>
> Yes, we gave up on having the OID display match the GUC; we just
> display som
On Tue, Apr 1, 2014 at 10:45:29AM -0700, Jeff Janes wrote:
> I am suggesting it for at least some other things. I'm rather aggrieved that
> "
> \d+" without argument shows you the size and the description/comment for every
> table, but "\d+ foo" does not show you the size and description/comment
On Thu, Apr 10, 2014 at 01:05:32PM -0400, Greg Stark wrote:
> If it's conditional I think "when it matches a guc" is too hard for users to
> use.
Yes, we gave up on having the OID display match the GUC; we just
display something if and only if it oids are present.
Robert is talking about the "Id
If it's conditional I think "when it matches a guc" is too hard for users
to use.
I think "say nothing if oids are off and say something of their on" would
be fine. It would result in clutter for users which oids on by default but
that's a non default setting.
And the consequences of having oids
On Thu, Apr 10, 2014 at 12:23:40PM -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
> > What might make more sense is this:
> >
> > if ((tableinfo.relkind == 'r' || tableinfo.relkind == 'm') &&
> > /*
> > * No need to display default values; we already display a
> > * REPLIC
On Wed, Apr 9, 2014 at 11:42 AM, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 9, 2014 at 09:27:11AM -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
>> On Wed, Apr 9, 2014 at 1:02 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
>> > Robert Haas writes:
>> >> Well, that's sorta my concern. I mean, right now we've got people
>> >> saying "what the heck is
On 2014-04-09 11:42:32 -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 9, 2014 at 09:27:11AM -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
> > On Wed, Apr 9, 2014 at 1:02 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
> > > Robert Haas writes:
> > >> Well, that's sorta my concern. I mean, right now we've got people
> > >> saying "what the heck is
On Wed, Apr 9, 2014 at 09:27:11AM -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 9, 2014 at 1:02 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
> > Robert Haas writes:
> >> Well, that's sorta my concern. I mean, right now we've got people
> >> saying "what the heck is a replica identity?". But, if the logical
> >> decoding stu
On Wed, Apr 9, 2014 at 1:02 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
> Robert Haas writes:
>> Well, that's sorta my concern. I mean, right now we've got people
>> saying "what the heck is a replica identity?". But, if the logical
>> decoding stuff becomes popular, as I hope it will, that's going to be
>> an importa
On Wed, Apr 9, 2014 at 01:02:05AM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Robert Haas writes:
> > Well, that's sorta my concern. I mean, right now we've got people
> > saying "what the heck is a replica identity?". But, if the logical
> > decoding stuff becomes popular, as I hope it will, that's going to be
>
Robert Haas writes:
> Well, that's sorta my concern. I mean, right now we've got people
> saying "what the heck is a replica identity?". But, if the logical
> decoding stuff becomes popular, as I hope it will, that's going to be
> an important thing for people to adjust, and the information need
On Tue, Apr 8, 2014 at 5:37 PM, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 8, 2014 at 05:29:45PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
>> Bruce Momjian writes:
>> > If we ignore backward compatibility, then "Has OIDs" and "Identity
>> > Replica" are similar. One thing that strongly (for me) supports not
>> > always p
* Tom Lane (t...@sss.pgh.pa.us) wrote:
> Bruce Momjian writes:
> > If we ignore backward compatibility, then "Has OIDs" and "Identity
> > Replica" are similar. One thing that strongly (for me) supports not
> > always printing them is that I expect more people will be confused by
> > the mention o
On Tue, Apr 8, 2014 at 05:29:45PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Bruce Momjian writes:
> > If we ignore backward compatibility, then "Has OIDs" and "Identity
> > Replica" are similar. One thing that strongly (for me) supports not
> > always printing them is that I expect more people will be confused b
Bruce Momjian writes:
> If we ignore backward compatibility, then "Has OIDs" and "Identity
> Replica" are similar. One thing that strongly (for me) supports not
> always printing them is that I expect more people will be confused by
> the mention of OIDs or "Identity Replica" than will actually c
On Tue, Apr 1, 2014 at 01:36:02PM -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
> Although I agree with the general principle, I'm skeptical in this
> case. There are a bunch of table-level options, and I don't think
> it's very reasonable to expect that users are going to remember which
> ones are going to be displ
On Tue, Apr 1, 2014 at 8:42 AM, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 1, 2014 at 11:30:54AM -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
> > > OK, I have now applied the conditional display of "Replica Identity"
> > > patch (which is how it was originally coded anyway). The attached
> patch
> > > matches Tom's sugge
On 2014-04-01 13:36:02 -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
> I can't accept that tinkering with that is
> reducing clutter in any meaningful way; it's just change for the sake
> of change.
+1
Greetings,
Andres Freund
--
Andres Freund http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Developme
On Tue, Apr 1, 2014 at 12:09 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> Robert Haas writes:
>> On Tue, Apr 1, 2014 at 11:42 AM, Bruce Momjian wrote:
>>> The bottom line is we already have complex rules to display only what is
>>> _reasonable_. If you want everything, you have to look at the system
>>> tables.
>
>>
Robert Haas writes:
> On Tue, Apr 1, 2014 at 11:42 AM, Bruce Momjian wrote:
>> The bottom line is we already have complex rules to display only what is
>> _reasonable_. If you want everything, you have to look at the system
>> tables.
> I don't really agree with that. I understand that there's
Bruce Momjian writes:
> On Tue, Apr 1, 2014 at 11:30:54AM -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
>> Frankly, I think this is all completely wrong-headed. \d+ should
>> display *everything*. That's what the + means, isn't it? Coming up
>> with complex rules for which things get shown and which things get
>>
On Tue, Apr 1, 2014 at 11:42 AM, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 1, 2014 at 11:30:54AM -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
>> > OK, I have now applied the conditional display of "Replica Identity"
>> > patch (which is how it was originally coded anyway). The attached patch
>> > matches Tom's suggestion
On Tue, Apr 1, 2014 at 11:30:54AM -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
> > OK, I have now applied the conditional display of "Replica Identity"
> > patch (which is how it was originally coded anyway). The attached patch
> > matches Tom's suggestion of displaying the same OID text, just
> > conditionally.
>
On Sun, Mar 30, 2014 at 10:04 AM, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> On Sat, Mar 29, 2014 at 06:33:39PM -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote:
>> On Sat, Mar 29, 2014 at 06:16:19PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
>> > Bruce Momjian writes:
>> > > Are you saying most people like "Has OIDs: yes", or the idea of just
>> > > displa
On Sat, Mar 29, 2014 at 06:33:39PM -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> On Sat, Mar 29, 2014 at 06:16:19PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> > Bruce Momjian writes:
> > > Are you saying most people like "Has OIDs: yes", or the idea of just
> > > displaying _a_ line if there are OIDs? Based on default_with_oids,
On Sat, Mar 29, 2014 at 06:16:19PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Bruce Momjian writes:
> > Are you saying most people like "Has OIDs: yes", or the idea of just
> > displaying _a_ line if there are OIDs? Based on default_with_oids,
> > perhaps we should display "With OIDs".
>
> > I agree it is no unan
Bruce Momjian writes:
> Are you saying most people like "Has OIDs: yes", or the idea of just
> displaying _a_ line if there are OIDs? Based on default_with_oids,
> perhaps we should display "With OIDs".
> I agree it is no unanimous. I am curious how large the majority has to
> be to change a ps
On 03/29/2014 06:10 PM, Bruce Momjian wrote:
On Sat, Mar 29, 2014 at 05:10:49PM -0400, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
On 03/29/2014 04:49 PM, Bruce Momjian wrote:
On Sat, Mar 29, 2014 at 09:59:36AM -0700, David Johnston wrote:
As my belief is that 99% of the uses of \d are for human consumption
(becau
On Sat, Mar 29, 2014 at 05:10:49PM -0400, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
>
> On 03/29/2014 04:49 PM, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> >On Sat, Mar 29, 2014 at 09:59:36AM -0700, David Johnston wrote:
> >>As my belief is that 99% of the uses of \d are for human consumption
> >>(because machines should in most cases hi
On 03/29/2014 04:49 PM, Bruce Momjian wrote:
On Sat, Mar 29, 2014 at 09:59:36AM -0700, David Johnston wrote:
As my belief is that 99% of the uses of \d are for human consumption
(because machines should in most cases hit the catalogs directly) then
strictly displaying "Includes OIDs" when appro
On Sat, Mar 29, 2014 at 09:59:36AM -0700, David Johnston wrote:
> As my belief is that 99% of the uses of \d are for human consumption
> (because machines should in most cases hit the catalogs directly) then
> strictly displaying "Includes OIDs" when appropriate has my +1.
>
> Uses of \d+ in regre
Bruce Momjian wrote
> On Fri, Mar 28, 2014 at 03:53:32PM -0300, Fabrízio de Royes Mello wrote:
>> On Fri, Mar 28, 2014 at 3:41 PM, Tom Lane <
> tgl@.pa
> > wrote:
>> >
>> > Bruce Momjian <
> bruce@
> > writes:
>> > > On Thu, Mar 27, 2014 at 02:54:26PM -0400, Stephen Frost wrote:
>> > >> I belie
On Fri, Mar 28, 2014 at 03:53:32PM -0300, Fabrízio de Royes Mello wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 28, 2014 at 3:41 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> >
> > Bruce Momjian writes:
> > > On Thu, Mar 27, 2014 at 02:54:26PM -0400, Stephen Frost wrote:
> > >> I believe Bruce was suggesting to show it when it is set to *not* t
On Mar 28, 2014, at 2:41 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> Bruce Momjian writes:
>> On Thu, Mar 27, 2014 at 02:54:26PM -0400, Stephen Frost wrote:
>>> I believe Bruce was suggesting to show it when it is set to *not* the
>>> default, which strikes me as perfectly reasonable.
>
>> We seem to be split on the
* Tom Lane (t...@sss.pgh.pa.us) wrote:
> Bruce Momjian writes:
> > On Thu, Mar 27, 2014 at 02:54:26PM -0400, Stephen Frost wrote:
> >> I believe Bruce was suggesting to show it when it is set to *not* the
> >> default, which strikes me as perfectly reasonable.
>
> > We seem to be split on the ide
On Fri, Mar 28, 2014 at 3:41 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
>
> Bruce Momjian writes:
> > On Thu, Mar 27, 2014 at 02:54:26PM -0400, Stephen Frost wrote:
> >> I believe Bruce was suggesting to show it when it is set to *not* the
> >> default, which strikes me as perfectly reasonable.
>
> > We seem to be spli
Bruce Momjian writes:
> On Thu, Mar 27, 2014 at 02:54:26PM -0400, Stephen Frost wrote:
>> I believe Bruce was suggesting to show it when it is set to *not* the
>> default, which strikes me as perfectly reasonable.
> We seem to be split on the idea of having "Has OIDs" display only when
> the oid
On Thu, Mar 27, 2014 at 02:54:26PM -0400, Stephen Frost wrote:
> * Euler Taveira (eu...@timbira.com.br) wrote:
> > On 27-03-2014 10:15, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> > > When we made OIDs optional, we added an oid status display to \d+:
> > >
> > > test=> \d+ test
> > >Table
On 2014-03-27 09:15:52 -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> When we made OIDs optional, we added an oid status display to \d+:
>
> test=> \d+ test
>Table "public.test"
>Column | Type | Modifiers | Storage | Stats target | Description
> +-
On 03/27/2014 04:43 PM, David Johnston wrote:
Bruce Momjian wrote
When we made OIDs optional, we added an oid status display to \d+:
test=> \d+ test
Table "public.test"
Column | Type | Modifiers | Storage | Stats target | Description
Bruce Momjian wrote
> When we made OIDs optional, we added an oid status display to \d+:
>
> test=> \d+ test
>Table "public.test"
>Column | Type | Modifiers | Storage | Stats target | Description
> +-+---+-+
* Euler Taveira (eu...@timbira.com.br) wrote:
> On 27-03-2014 10:15, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> > When we made OIDs optional, we added an oid status display to \d+:
> >
> > test=> \d+ test
> > Table "public.test"
> > Column | Type | Modifiers | Storage | Stats
On 27-03-2014 10:15, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> When we made OIDs optional, we added an oid status display to \d+:
>
> test=> \d+ test
>Table "public.test"
>Column | Type | Modifiers | Storage | Stats target | Description
> +-+
When we made OIDs optional, we added an oid status display to \d+:
test=> \d+ test
Table "public.test"
Column | Type | Modifiers | Storage | Stats target | Description
+-+---+-+--+-
47 matches
Mail list logo
