Tom Lane wrote:
Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Tom Lane wrote:
I thought the "S" suggestion was much better than this.
My problem is that it uses a letter as a modifier, while all other
letters are object specifications. '+' is a modifier. We need another
modifier that isn't a letter. No one knew \dtS worked because 'S'
doesn't look like a modifier.
I don't buy that argument in the least. I think the reason people didn't know about "S" was they didn't RTFM (or possibly that the FM isn't sufficiently clear). Changing to a different character won't make any difference at all, only improving the docs will make a difference.
But I could live with using "-" to suppress system objects. That isn't a character we're likely to want to use as a command metacharacter someday.
ISTM one problem is we are inconsistent about it - \d and \dt don't show system objects, but \df shows system functions. Reading TFM is a good thing, but so is consistency.
'-' isn't a very nice choice, because \df-+ would be really confusing. If you don't like '&', then '@' and '!' seem to be at least as free as '-' ;-)
cheers
andrew
---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 9: the planner will ignore your desire to choose an index scan if your
joining column's datatypes do not match
