* Dave Page ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> Stephen Frost wrote:
> >In terms of behaviour changes, I think it'd be nice to show the schema
> >name when necessary but otherwise don't, ala how '\d <view>' works.
> In my case that would be awkward as pgAdmin would then need to try to 
> work out what the actual table was based on the search path used for the 
> users query.

Actually, as mentioned in another thread, a function to take a table
name and a search_path and return the 'fully qualified' table name would
make that much easier, and would be useful in other situations.

> >Another option might be to omit the schema when an alias is provided, or
> >maybe even omit the entire table name in favor of the alias.
> That would make it very painful as I'd need to parse the query client 
> side to resolve the table names. Yeuch.

Indeed, if you're not constructing the queries that would make things
somewhat difficult.  Then again, parsing the explain output seems like
it's going to be rather difficult itself anyway.

> Just adding the schema name seems the most sensible and usable option - 
> not to mention the easiest!

While completely ignoring the current behaviour and likely the reason
it's done the way it is now...  explain output was, and still is
primairly, for humans to read.



Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Reply via email to