On Tuesday 09 December 2008 15:49:17 Alvaro Herrera wrote: > Josh Williams wrote: > > On Tue, 2008-12-09 at 09:32 -0500, Tom Lane wrote: > > > I think the place that such information could most naturally be > > > squeezed into psql's \d commands would be to add another type of footer > > > information to \dt, eg > > > > > > Table "foo.bar" > > > ... > > > Indexes: > > > "bari" ... > > > Owned sequences: > > > "baz" owned by col1 > > > > That makes more sense, though isn't that a little repetitive when > > "default nextval(...)" is visible immediately above it? > > I don't think that it is all that repetitive. It's not uncommon to see > people creating sequences and assigning to default values, without > setting the OWNED BY bits. It's good that this information is very > visible. It's only a couple more lines in the common case anyway (if > you want to save half of that overhead, make it a single line when > there's a single sequence.) >
It feels like noise to me; showing indexes/triggers/constraints affect how you interact with a table, but whether a sequence is owned or not doesn't make a significant difference. Given we don't list other dependencies (views/functions/etc...) I'm not excited about adding this one. -- Robert Treat Conjecture: http://www.xzilla.net Consulting: http://www.omniti.com -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
