>>>>> "Bruce" == Bruce Momjian <br...@momjian.us> writes:
>> As far as I understood Andrew's use case, he was specifically *not* >> interested in a complete representation of an index definition, but >> rather about whether it had certain properties that would be of >> interest to query-constructing applications. Well, I wouldn't limit it to query-constructing applications. I'll give another random example that I thought of. Suppose an administrative GUI (I have no idea if any of the existing GUIs do this) has an option to do CLUSTER on a table; how should it know which indexes to offer the user to cluster on, without access to amclusterable? Bruce> Would it be helpful to output an array of strings representing Bruce> the index definition? Why would that help, if the point is to enable programmatic access to information? Anyway, what I haven't seen in this thread is any implementable counter-proposal other than the "just hardcode the name 'btree'" response that was given in the JDBC thread, which I don't consider acceptable in any sense. Is 9.6 going to go out like this or is action going to be taken before rc1? -- Andrew (irc:RhodiumToad) -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
