Re: SHOW TABLES

From: Thom Brown <thombrown(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: "Marc G(dot) Fournier" <scrappy(at)hub(dot)org>
Cc: Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>, Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: SHOW TABLES
Date: 2010-07-15 16:20:44
Message-ID: AANLkTila08S8aYq4-NSwTNLyQRXTM5q5DeWLxF8VyTwA@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On 15 July 2010 17:16, Marc G. Fournier <scrappy(at)hub(dot)org> wrote:
> On Thu, 15 Jul 2010, Thom Brown wrote:
>
>> On 15 July 2010 17:07, Marc G. Fournier <scrappy(at)hub(dot)org> wrote:
>>>
>>> On Thu, 15 Jul 2010, Thom Brown wrote:
>>>
>>>> If it's only a psql problem, why implement it as SQL?  Is it just so
>>>> we're
>>>> not adding keywords specifically to psql?  In that case, it shouldn't
>>>> support QUIT.
>>>
>>> Personally, I think this is somethign that should go into the backend ...
>>> I'd like to be able to write perl scripts that talk to the backend
>>> without
>>> having to remember all the various system tables I need to query / join
>>> to
>>> get the same results as \d gives me in psql ... same for any interface
>>> language, really ...
>>>
>>
>> Isn't that what the information_schema catalog is for?
>
> I'd rather write:
>
> SHOW TABLES;
>
> then:
>
> SELECT  table_name
>  FROM information_schema.tables
>  WHERE table_type = 'BASE TABLE'
>   AND table_schema NOT IN
>       ('pg_catalog', 'information_schema');
>
> And, the latter, unless I'm doing it regularly, is alot harder to remember
> then the former ...

Yes, I see what you mean now. That would simplify things greatly.

Thom

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message David Fetter 2010-07-15 16:30:38 Re: SHOW TABLES
Previous Message Joshua D. Drake 2010-07-15 16:19:51 Re: SHOW TABLES