On Tue, Jul 11, 2017 at 4:16 AM, David Fetter <da...@fetter.org> wrote: > On Mon, Jul 10, 2017 at 05:33:34PM -0500, Robert Haas wrote: >> On Mon, Jul 10, 2017 at 2:15 AM, Amit Langote >> <langote_amit...@lab.ntt.co.jp> wrote: >> > I posted a patch upthread which makes \d hide partitions >> > (relispartition = true relations) and include them if the newly >> > proposed '!' modifier is specified. The '+' modifier is being >> > used to show additional detail of relations chosen to be listed at >> > all, so it seemed like a bad idea to extend its meaning to also >> > dictate whether partitions are to be listed. >> >> +1. That'd be a mess. > > With utmost respect, it's less messy than adding '!' to the already > way too random and mysterious syntax of psql's \ commands. What > should '\det!' mean? What about '\dT!'? > >> > Actually, if \d had shown RELKIND_PARTITIONED_TABLE tables as of >> > Type "partitioned table", we wouldn't need a separate flag for >> > marking a table as having partitions. >> >> I think that is false. Whether something is partitioned and whether >> it is a partition are independent concerns. > > So whatever we land on needs to mention partition_of and > has_partitions. Is that latter just its immediate partitions? > Recursion all the way down? Somewhere in between? >
We have patches proposed to address some of those concerns at [1] [1] https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/CAFjFpRcs5fOSfaAGAjT5C6=yvdd7mrx3knf_spb5dqzojgj...@mail.gmail.com -- Best Wishes, Ashutosh Bapat EnterpriseDB Corporation The Postgres Database Company -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
