On Mon, Mar 30, 2009 at 10:52 AM, Bruce Momjian <br...@momjian.us> wrote: > Robert Haas wrote: >> On Mon, Mar 30, 2009 at 10:13 AM, Bruce Momjian <br...@momjian.us> wrote: >> > Maybe the best we are going to do is to have any pattern supplied to \d* >> > assume 'S' (include system objects). ?I actually have a patch that does >> > that, attached. (It is from January so might need adjustment.) >> >> That still has the problem that "\df a*" is horribly inconsistent with >> "\df". It might be reasonable to assume that if a name without >> wildcards is given to any \d command, it should display whatever >> object it finds, user or system - but I can't see doing it for any >> wildcard at all. > > I think you are re-iterating the URL I referenced when I started this > thread: > > http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2009-01/msg01443.php > > I think the big question is whether the inconsistency (pattern implies > 'S') is worth accepting for greater usability.
The inconsistency would be less objectionable if there were a way to override it when it's not what you want. ...Robert -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
