On Fri, Jul 15, 2011 at 4:48 PM, Josh Berkus <j...@agliodbs.com> wrote: > I am unable to figure out the status of the pg_comments patch from this > thread. What's going on with it?
I don't blame you :-) I think this thread got so confusing because two separate topics were intertwined. (I'm going to try to change this thread subject to reflect the fact that we're really talking about pg_comments here now.) First, the original post, with a small patch to fix one of the many problems with psql's \dd command. That patch was rejected because it only plugged one of the many problems with \dd. I have since started another thread[1] with a plausible fix for \dd and several other backslash commands, so that we will have working displays of all comments with minimal duplication. Second, we have the pg_comments view (latest version is the "v10.WIP"). Despite its WIP tag, I think it is actually pretty close to being complete at this point. The first concern which I raised a concern in that thread[2]: > 1.) For now, I'm just ignoring the issue of visibility checks; is the only big issue I see as still outstanding. At first, I was assuming that \dd should naturally read from pg_comments to fetch the object comments it is interested in. But that would mean that we'd need some way to duplicate those "visibility checks" \dd was doing, either in \dd or in another "is_visible" column in pg_comments. I haven't tried either of those options out yet, but I was worried they'd both be tricky/ugly. Which leads me to think, maybe it's not so bad if \dd stays the way I've suggested in thread[1], i.e. just querying pg_[sh]description for the five object types it needs directly. After all, \dd will IMO be close to useless/deprecated once we have pg_comments; it'll be much easier to just query pg_comments for what you're looking for directly, and \dd will only display five funky object types, anyway. How do folks feel about this issue? The second concern I raised with the last pg_comments patch, > I think now might be a good time to > re-examine what types of objects are displayed by \dd. should be handled by thread[1], and the third concern is just about whitespace. Oh, and docs need some adjusting too, and it'd be nice if someone sanity checked my guesses for the "is_system" column (or if it's not needed, that's OK too). So that's where the pg_comments patch stands, at least AIUI. Clear as mud yet? :) Josh [1] http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2011-07/msg00459.php [2] http://archives.postgresql.org/message-id/CAK3UJRGNwKq0c2VsSYV-Mg55Y_kvZE=8fmr_xt8rzp__1lo...@mail.gmail.com -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers