On Monday, March 21, 2016, Robert Haas <robertmh...@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Mon, Mar 21, 2016 at 2:09 PM, David G. Johnston
> <david.g.johns...@gmail.com <javascript:;>> wrote:
> > On Monday, March 21, 2016, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us <javascript:;>>
> wrote:
> >> "David G. Johnston" <david.g.johns...@gmail.com <javascript:;>> writes:
> >> > I'd rather not omit sleep but removing "Watch every" is fine
> (preferred
> >> > actually), so:
> >> > Title Is Here     Mon Mar 21 15:05:06 2016 (5s)
> >>
> >> Meh ... seems a bit awkward to me.  Couldn't you include " (5s)" in the
> >> title, if you want that info?  If it's variable, you could still
> >> accommodate that:
> >
> > Actually, only if it's a variable that you setup and repeat and you
> show.  A
> > bit cumbersome and mixes the parts that are title and those that are
> present
> > only because you are watching.
> Ah, come on.  This doesn't really seem like an issue we should spend
> more time quibbling about.  I think Tom's version is fine.
Tom doesn't care enough to veto and you don't really care...

I'll admit it's awkward because it's abbreviated but if someone enters
\watch 5 and then sees (5s) in the title I think they can put two and two

If the watched query takes a long to run, or there is a disruption, knowing
when the last one ran and how often it is supposed to run is useful info to
have at ones fingertips.  I have done this myself occasionally so I'm not
speaking from theory.  But I won't complain if its removed.

David J.

Reply via email to