On Mon, Mar 30, 2009 at 09:59:41PM +0200, Dimitri Fontaine wrote: > Hi, > > Le 30 mars 09 à 16:52, Bruce Momjian a écrit : >> I think the big question is whether the inconsistency (pattern implies >> 'S') is worth accepting for greater usability. > > > My answer is yes, please, definitely, go for it. > We don't need idiot-proof easy to remember semantics, we need useful > ones... The former category is already taken care of by some other open > source database software, have I been told... > > What about a mail with some content? Look, a user-level proposal draft! > :) > \dt lists user tables only > \dtS lists system tables only
All of the S ones should probably mean, "include system objects" rather than "only system objects." Cheers, David. -- David Fetter <da...@fetter.org> http://fetter.org/ Phone: +1 415 235 3778 AIM: dfetter666 Yahoo!: dfetter Skype: davidfetter XMPP: david.fet...@gmail.com 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