On Sat, Apr 11, 2009 at 11:13:59AM -0400, Tom Lane wrote: > My own take on it is that actually I'd prefer one command for all of > these. If I say "\df sum" it would be good if the output included the > sum() aggregates; the reason being that I might be wondering if I can > create a plain function named sum. If I have to check not only \df and > \da but also \dw for conflicts, that's going to be a real PITA. Also, > pity the poor newbie who is unclear on the distinctions between these > different function-looking animals, and is just trying to find some > documentation on rank(). > > If we were designing in a green field I think you could make a real > strong case for a single \df command with an output column "type" having > the alternatives regular, aggregate, window, and maybe trigger.
What would it do for triggers? Sounds like a general identifier search; there seem to be two big namespaces in PG at the moment, that of things that look like function calls and that of relations (and their types). CREATE TABLE foo ( i int, t text ); and CREATE TYPE foo AS ( t text); both go into the same namespace so would appear to be a similar symptom as above. I have a feeling this is going a bit further than you're thinking above. Not sure about the newbie argument; I'd expect them to be using google and wouldn't know much about the backslash commands in psql. -- Sam http://samason.me.uk/ -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
