2011/8/9 Shigeru Hanada <shigeru.han...@gmail.com>: > I'm the author of that patch, sorry for confusion. May I explain the > background of implementing those command? :) > > Basically, during implementing foreign table support, I tried to follow > the existing design. > > I found two backslash command groups in psql, \de[wsu] and \d[tvsT], > which are relevant to foreign table. Former is a group for listing > relation (table, view, sequence and type), and they have common output > format. Users would use them (sometimes with combination like \dtv) to > list only specified type of relations. OTOH latter is a group for > listing SQL/MED objects (wrapper, server and user mapping), and commands > in that group have different output columns. Users would use them to > see detail of FDW options, maybe mainly FDW options. > > They had been implemented in different ways then, and I kept > implementation similar to existing codes for each. But now, as you say, > they seem redundant and inconsistent each other. > >> +1 for getting rid of one of them; I don't really care which one gets >> the axe. Though we should make sure to be able to show all possible >> columns in whichever command we keep (i.e. add "Options" column to >> \dE+ if we keep that one). > > I'm not sure whether getting rid of one of them is better. > But maybe \dE is useless than \det, because former doesn't shows more > information than simple \d.
Looking at this again, I see that they each have certain advantages. \det shows more information that is specific to foreign tables; but I don't want to get rid of \dE because it's useful to be able to do stuff like \dtE to see tables and foreign tables in a single listing. So maybe we should just leave this well enough alone. -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
