On Sun, May 25, 2008 at 10:05:10AM -0400, Alvaro Herrera wrote: > Tom Lane wrote: > > Alvaro Herrera <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > Would anyone object to \df displaying a function's volatility? Maybe > > > limit it to \df+? > > > > Huh? \df+ has displayed volatility for a long time, and I don't recall > > any great demand to move it into \df. > > Hmm, right. Maybe the problem I have is that we made \df+ so wide so as > to be almost useless by now ... > > I think this is mostly caused by the "args" column getting too wide. > Can we remove the OUT params from it?
Not a great idea. Maybe having the output of \df+ be \x'd would help more. > BTW what happened to the idea of displaying only user functions by > default? Some of the people who'd approve such a patch have trouble imagining why the other 99.99%+ of the use base find having the system functions appear by default to be useless clutter :( Cheers, David. -- David Fetter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://fetter.org/ Phone: +1 415 235 3778 AIM: dfetter666 Yahoo!: dfetter Skype: davidfetter XMPP: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Remember to vote! Consider donating to Postgres: http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
