Re: FWD: Re: Updated backslash consistency patch

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>, Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>, Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>, Greg Sabino Mullane <greg(at)turnstep(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: FWD: Re: Updated backslash consistency patch
Date: 2009-01-15 22:24:24
Message-ID: 13316.1232058264@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> You seem to be assuming that conflicts between user-defined functions
> and system functions are a common problem against which users need
> protection. I have been using PostgreSQL for almost 10 years and am
> not sure that I've EVER had a problem with this.

Probably not, else it would be seared into your memory and you'd not be
in favor of making a change that increases the odds of repeating the
experience ;-)

> On the other hand, I want to look at and search my user-defined
> functions FREQUENTLY. I don't care about the system functions. If I
> type \df a*, it's not because I want to see all 6 versions of the
> absolute value function and 61 other functions, it's because I don't
> want to think hard enough to remember how I spelled the first word in
> one of my functions that I know starts with "a".

Well, maybe we do need to go with the \df \dfS \dfU approach.
But I'm still convinced that setting things up so that it's impossible
to search both classes of functions together is a seriously bad idea.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Justin Pasher 2009-01-15 22:30:01 Re: Autovacuum daemon terminated by signal 11
Previous Message Stephen Frost 2009-01-15 22:21:48 Re: FWD: Re: Updated backslash consistency patch