On Wed, Jul 24, 2019 at 9:01 AM Andres Freund <and...@anarazel.de> wrote: > Based on a quick skim of the thread - which means I most definitely > missed things - there's not been discussion of why we actually want to > add this. Who's the prospective user of this facility? And why wouldn't > they just query pg_am[proc]? None of this information seems like it's > going to be even remotely targeted towards even advanced users. For > developers it's not clear what these add?
I see your point regarding pg_am details. Probably nobody expect developers need this. And probably even developers don't need this, because it's easier to see IndexAmRoutine directly with more details. So, +1 for removing this. pg_amproc for gin/gist/sp-gist/brin is probably for developers. But I think pg_amproc for btree/hash could be useful for advanced users. btree/hash opclasses could be written by advanced users using pl/something, I've faced that several times. > Adding stuff to psql isn't free. It adds clutter to psql's help output, > the commands need to be maintained (including cross-version code). Sure. ------ Alexander Korotkov Postgres Professional: http://www.postgrespro.com The Russian Postgres Company
