Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Peter Eisentraut wrote:
>> The inconsistency is that there is a separate "show permissions" command
>> for tables, but for schemas it's now under "extra information". Now we
>> can't be sure where the permission information for the next object will
>> end up. That's not good.
> With \dp having a schema column, how would we display permissions there?
IIRC Peter had suggested inventing a series of \zX commands to parallel
the \dX commands. I don't have a problem with that in the abstract, but
who's going to step up and do it exactly? The existence of \dp would
create a bit of a wart in the consistency of things anyway, so it's not
like we would have a solution that's both 100% self-consistent and 100%
upward compatible.
Personally I don't think that the \-command output has to be totally
consistent from version to version --- we've never intended it to be
machine-readable only person-readable. So I think the CVS-tip \dn+
behavior is okay until we get around to inventing \zX or adding
permissions to the other \d+ commands or whatever the long-term answer
turns out to be.
regards, tom lane
---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 4: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster
