David Fetter <da...@fetter.org> writes: > Revised patch attached. \dw does not need an 'S' decorator,
Yes it does. We have only painfully gotten to the point of having consistent behavior across all the \d commands. We are not going to break that consistency before it's even shipped. Perhaps more to the point: the previous round of discussion about this already rejected the idea of treating window functions as a category fundamentally separate from plain functions --- that is, we are not following the "aggregate" model of having separate commands for aggregate functions. So it's not apparent to me that a separate \dw command is a good solution to start with. regards, tom lane -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers