* Peter Eisentraut (peter.eisentr...@2ndquadrant.com) wrote:
> On 10/11/16 7:51 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> > 1. Do nothing.
> > 2. Remove the prosrc column from \df+ altogether.
> > 3. Suppress prosrc for PL functions, but continue to show it for
> >    C and internal functions (and, probably, rename it to something
> >    other than "Source code" in that case).
> > 4. #3 plus show PL function source code in footers.
> One related annoyance I have with psql is that \d+ on a view *does* show
> the "source code" in the footer, because it's often too long and bulky
> and ugly and unrelated to why I wanted to use the +.

I tend to agree with that, though I believe it's a topic for another

> I'm OK with just removing all the source codes from the \d family and
> using the \s family instead.

Ok, great, thanks for clarifying that.  Since we only have '\sf' today,
I think the prevailing option here is then to make the change to
removing 'prosrc' from \df+, have an 'internal name' column, and have
users use \sf for functions.

If anyone feels differently, please speak up.

Personally, I like the idea of a '\sv' for views, though we should
discuss that on a new thread.



Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Reply via email to