Dimitri Fontaine <dfonta...@hi-media.com> writes:
> Le 15 janv. 09 à 17:16, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> a écrit :
>> I agree, this change mostly sucks, and particularly with respect to
>> \df.
> Maybe it does so much 'cause you're developing system functions.
No, I hardly ever use \df on a function I'm working on just at the
moment, because I know what it's supposed to be. It's remembering
functions that I haven't used lately that is the issue.
> I've yet to try it but think it's a good feature.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Indeed...
> What about a new \dfU listing only non system objects ( User ones ) ?
\dfS together with \dfU would at least be a reasonably symmetric
extension. I'm still of the opinion that neither is really a very
helpful thing to use in connection with a pattern.
regards, tom lane
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
