On Mon, Jul 31, 2017 at 7:06 PM, Robert Haas <robertmh...@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Thu, Jul 13, 2017 at 8:40 PM, Amit Langote
> <langote_amit...@lab.ntt.co.jp> wrote:
> > On 2017/07/13 19:57, Ashutosh Bapat wrote:
> >> On Thu, Jul 13, 2017 at 12:01 PM, Amit Langote
> >> <langote_amit...@lab.ntt.co.jp> wrote:
> >>> The description of \d[S+] currently does not mention that it will list
> >>> materialized views and foreign tables.  Attached fixes that.
> >>>
> >>
> >> I guess the same change is applicable to the description of \d[S+] NAME
> as well.
> >
> > Thanks for the review.  Fixed in the attached.
> The problem with this, IMV, is that it makes those lines more than 80
> characters, whereas right now they are not.

​84: ​  \\d[S+]                 list (foreign) tables, (materialized)
views, and sequences\n
76:   \\d[S+]                 list (foreign) tables, (mat.) views, and

  And that line seems
> doomed to get even longer in the future.

​Cross that bridge when we come to it?

Lumping the tables and views into a single label (I'd go with "relations"
since these are all - albeit non-exclusively - things that can appear in a
FROM clause) would greatly aid things here.  Indexes and sequences would
retain their own identities.  But I seem to recall that elsewhere we call
indexes relations - and I'm not sure about sequences.

I'm partial to calling it "relations and sequences" and letting the reader
check the documentation for what "relations" means in this context.

David J.

Reply via email to