Robert Haas wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 30, 2009 at 10:13 AM, Bruce Momjian <br...@momjian.us> wrote:
> > Maybe the best we are going to do is to have any pattern supplied to \d*
> > assume 'S' (include system objects). ?I actually have a patch that does
> > that, attached. (It is from January so might need adjustment.)
>
> That still has the problem that "\df a*" is horribly inconsistent with
> "\df". It might be reasonable to assume that if a name without
> wildcards is given to any \d command, it should display whatever
> object it finds, user or system - but I can't see doing it for any
> wildcard at all.
I think you are re-iterating the URL I referenced when I started this
thread:
http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2009-01/msg01443.php
I think the big question is whether the inconsistency (pattern implies
'S') is worth accepting for greater usability.
--
Bruce Momjian <br...@momjian.us> http://momjian.us
EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com
+ If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your backup. +
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
