Tom Lane wrote:
> Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > Tom Lane wrote:
> >> Oh, okay.  I would not object to suppressing pg_temp_NNN schemas from
> >> the \dn display.  That isn't what this patch does, however.
> > OK.  I read the TODO and it says only:
> >     * Have psql \dn show only visible schemas using current_schemas()
> That TODO was your interpretation of the discussion; I'm not sure anyone
> else bought into it.
> > so that's what I did, but I think now I have to add a test so only
> > non-visible temp schemas are suppressed,
> You are complicating something that could be simple.  Why not just
> suppress schemas named 'pg_temp_XXX', period?  I don't see any strong
> reason to display them, whether they are your own backend's temp schema
> or not.  Arguably, the fact that temp tables are kept in a special
> schema is an implementation detail that most people won't care about.
> And there is no data that \dn can show that is really important for temp
> schemas.  The owner column is at best misleading...

Also, how do we know something is a temp schema?  Just the prefix

  Bruce Momjian                        |
  [EMAIL PROTECTED]               |  (610) 359-1001
  +  If your life is a hard drive,     |  13 Roberts Road
  +  Christ can be your backup.        |  Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073

---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 1: subscribe and unsubscribe commands go to [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Reply via email to