Tom Lane wrote: > Magnus Hagander <mag...@hagander.net> writes: > > On Friday, July 8, 2016, Michael Paquier <michael.paqu...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> Fujii-san has reminded me of the fact that we do not show in \df+ the > >> parallel status of a function. The output of \df+ is already very > >> large, so I guess that any people mentally sane already use it with > >> the expanded display mode, and it may not matter adding more > >> information. > >> Thoughts about adding this piece of information? > > > Seems like a good idea to me. It's going to be useful in debugging > > If we're going to change \df+ at all, could I lobby for putting the Owner > column next to Security? They're logically related, and not related to > Volatility which somehow got crammed between. So I'm imagining the column > order as > > Schema | Name | Result data type | Argument data types | Type | Security > | Owner | Volatility | Parallel | Language | Source code | Description > > Or maybe Owner then Security.
Agreed. As a separate concern, IMO having the source code in a \df+ column is almost completely useless. I propose to split that out to a separate \df command (say \df% or \df/) that shows *only* the source code. -- Álvaro Herrera http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/ PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
