On Sun, Oct 29, 2017 at 12:47 AM, Pavel Stehule <pavel.steh...@gmail.com> wrote:
> 2017-10-28 23:35 GMT+02:00 Alexander Korotkov <a.korot...@postgrespro.ru>: > >> On Sat, Oct 28, 2017 at 3:46 PM, Pavel Stehule <pavel.steh...@gmail.com> >> wrote: >> >>> 2017-09-22 21:31 GMT+02:00 Pavel Stehule <pavel.steh...@gmail.com>: >>> >>>> >>>> >>>> 2017-09-22 21:12 GMT+02:00 Peter Eisentraut < >>>> peter.eisentr...@2ndquadrant.com>: >>>> >>>>> On 9/22/17 09:16, Pavel Stehule wrote: >>>>> > Example: somebody set SORT_COLUMNS to schema_name value. This is >>>>> > nonsense for \l command >>>>> > >>>>> > Now, I am thinking so more correct and practical design is based on >>>>> > special mode, activated by variable >>>>> > >>>>> > PREFER_SIZE_SORT .. (off, asc, desc) >>>>> > >>>>> > This has sense for wide group of commands that can show size. And >>>>> when >>>>> > size is not visible, then this option is not active. >>>>> >>>>> Maybe this shouldn't be a variable at all. It's not like you'll set >>>>> this as a global preference. You probably want it for one command >>>>> only. >>>>> So a per-command option might make more sense. >>>>> >>>> >>>> Sure, I cannot to know, what users will do. But, when I need to see a >>>> size of objects, then I prefer the sort by size desc every time. If I need >>>> to find some object, then I can to use a searching in pager. So in my case, >>>> this settings will be in psqlrc. In GoodData we used years own >>>> customization - the order by size was hardcoded and nobody reported me any >>>> issue. >>>> >>>> Alexander proposed some per command option, but current syntax of psql >>>> commands don't allows some simple parametrization. If it can be user >>>> friendly, then it should be short. From implementation perspective, it >>>> should be simply parsed. It should be intuitive too - too much symbols >>>> together is not good idea. >>>> >>>> Maybe some prefix design - but it is not design for common people >>>> (although these people don't use psql usually) >>>> >>>> '\sort size \dt ? >>>> >>>> \dt:sort_by_size >>>> \dt+:sort_by_size ? >>>> >>>> I don't see any good design in this direction >>>> >>>> >>> I though about Alexander proposal, and I am thinking so it can be >>> probably best if we respect psql design. I implemented two command suffixes >>> (supported only when it has sense) "s" sorted by size and "d" as descent >>> >>> so list of tables can be sorted with commands: >>> >>> \dt+sd (in this case, the order is not strict), so command >>> \dtsd+ is working too (same \disd+ or \di+sd) >>> >>> These two chars are acceptable. Same principle is used for \l command >>> >>> \lsd+ or \l+sd >>> >>> What do you think about it? >>> >> >> I think \lsd+ command would be another postgres meme :) >> BTW, are you going to provide an ability to sort by name, schema? >> > > It has sense only for tables - probably only \dtn "n" like name > In general, this approach looks good for me. Regarding current state of patch, I'd like to see new options documented. Also, it would be better to replace "bool sort_size" with enum assuming there could be other sorting orders in future. ------ Alexander Korotkov Postgres Professional: http://www.postgrespro.com The Russian Postgres Company
