From: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: psql's \dn versus temp schemas |
Date: | 2010-09-19 02:50:33 |
Message-ID: | AANLkTinzcTJBTtaj27Nw=-i6hfU5Pzwzo8atwOt=b3N2@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Sat, Sep 18, 2010 at 6:35 PM, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> On Sat, Sep 18, 2010 at 3:11 PM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
>> This is at least inconsistent and at worst wildly misleading. ISTM
>> we ought to adopt some combination of the following ideas:
>
> I vote for this combination:
>
>> 3. Don't show either pg_temp_nn or pg_toast_temp_nn schemas, not even
>> for the current backend.
>
> and
>
>> With any of 1-3 we could also consider adding a rule that \dn+
>> doesn't hide them.
Or perhaps another option would be to make \dnS display these. Not
sure whether I like that or not.
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise Postgres Company
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Joseph Adams | 2010-09-19 03:48:21 | Re: patch: Add JSON datatype to PostgreSQL (GSoC, WIP) |
Previous Message | Andrew Dunstan | 2010-09-19 00:35:11 | Re: Postgres 9.0.0 release scheduled |