On Thu, 27 Nov 2025 at 08:52, Pavel Stehule <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > st 26. 11. 2025 v 14:01 odesílatel Pavel Stehule <[email protected]> > napsal: >> >> Hi >> >> st 26. 11. 2025 v 13:44 odesílatel Euler Taveira <[email protected]> napsal: >>> >>> On Wed, Nov 26, 2025, at 4:48 AM, M.Atıf Ceylan wrote: >>> > Hello, >>> > This patch adds two new meta-command modifiers for \dt(+) and \di(+): >>> > >>> > - O : sort by total relation size descending >>> > - o : sort by total relation size ascending >>> > >>> >>> Thanks for your contribution. Register your patch in the next commitfest >>> [1] so >>> we don't loose track of it. >>> >>> I didn't look at your patch but I was wondering if a general solution isn't >>> a >>> better way to add this feature. I wouldn't modify these specific psql >>> meta-commands, instead, I would add a new psql meta-command that defines >>> this >>> property for all objects if applicable. >>> >>> \sort [ name | size [ asc | desc ] ] >>> >>> I thought about a list to be cover other sort cases too but if things >>> starting >>> to be complex, it is time to write your own query. >> >> >> It is big question - if there should be specialized metacommand, or just >> variable or \pset setting >> >> it can be >> >> \set PREFERRED_ORDER size_desc >> \pset preffered_order size_desc >> >> >>> >>> >>> With a parameter, it appends the ORDER BY clause in the SQL commands >>> executed by >>> psql if applicable. Without a parameter, it uses the current behavior. >> >> >> There were a lot of proposals related to this topic some years ago. I wrote >> a lot of variants of this patch >> Generic design is very big, and solutions like proposed are not generic :-). >> We talked about this feature for maybe more than one year, and we didn't >> find a generally acceptable design. > > > https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/CAFj8pRAVV2TFHsFCV=c9aaeq7kpwgqblkowgronpan583zq...@mail.gmail.com > > >> >> >> At the end I wrote pspg, and the sort can be done (over result) there. Using >> a vertical cursor (column cursor) is very natural and user friendly. >> >> https://github.com/okbob/pspg >> >> Regards >> >> Pavel >> >>> >>> >>> >>> [1] https://commitfest.postgresql.org/57/ >>> >>> >>> -- >>> Euler Taveira >>> EDB https://www.enterprisedb.com/ >>> >>>
Hi hackers. I noted that this patch cf entry has the status "Ready for committer" [0]. I do not think so. I see major design concerns in the proposal. For my 2c, I would vote for general-purpose separate \sort command or some suffix for meta-command as proposed by Pavel in thead from 2017. I also suggest to rename commitfest entry to describe "what" instead of "how" [0] https://commitfest.postgresql.org/patch/6258/ -- Best regards, Kirill Reshke
