On Sat, Mar 29, 2014 at 06:16:19PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote: > Bruce Momjian <br...@momjian.us> writes: > > Are you saying most people like "Has OIDs: yes", or the idea of just > > displaying _a_ line if there are OIDs? Based on default_with_oids, > > perhaps we should display "With OIDs". > > > I agree it is no unanimous. I am curious how large the majority has to > > be to change a psql display value. > > What I actually suggested was not *changing* the line when it's to be > displayed, but suppressing it in the now-standard case where there's no > OIDs. > > Personally I find the argument that backwards compatibility must be > preserved to be pretty bogus; we have no hesitation in changing the > output of \d anytime we add a new feature. So I don't think there's > a good compatibility reason why the line has to be spelled exactly > "Has OIDs: yes" --- but there is a consistency reason, which is that > everything else we print in this part of the \d output is of the form > "label: info".
Ah, now I understand it --- you can argue that the new "Replica Identity" follows the same pattern, showing only for non-defaults (or at least it will once I commit the pending patch to do that). -- Bruce Momjian <br...@momjian.us> http://momjian.us EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com + Everyone has their own god. + -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
