* Tom Lane (t...@sss.pgh.pa.us) wrote: > Magnus Hagander <mag...@hagander.net> writes: > > On Friday, July 8, 2016, Michael Paquier <michael.paqu...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> Fujii-san has reminded me of the fact that we do not show in \df+ the > >> parallel status of a function. The output of \df+ is already very > >> large, so I guess that any people mentally sane already use it with > >> the expanded display mode, and it may not matter adding more > >> information. > >> Thoughts about adding this piece of information? > > > Seems like a good idea to me. It's going to be useful in debugging > > If we're going to change \df+ at all, could I lobby for putting the Owner > column next to Security? They're logically related, and not related to > Volatility which somehow got crammed between. So I'm imagining the column > order as > > Schema | Name | Result data type | Argument data types | Type | Security > | Owner | Volatility | Parallel | Language | Source code | Description > > Or maybe Owner then Security.
I've always wondered why there isn't any way to see the ACL for the function through \d commands. I'd suggest including that in \df+ also. Note that \dn+, \dL+ and \db+, for example, include access privs for those object types. Thanks! Stephen
Description: Digital signature