Re: [HACKERS] List schema contents

2006-06-09 Thread Tom Lane
"Jim C. Nasby" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > On Fri, Jun 09, 2006 at 04:55:07PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote: >> I'd be the first to agree that the behavior of \d isn't particularly >> orthogonal, but it's not the pattern language that's the problem, it's >> the command itself. > Perhaps \d without an ar

Re: [HACKERS] List schema contents

2006-06-09 Thread Jim C. Nasby
On Fri, Jun 09, 2006 at 04:55:07PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote: > "Jim C. Nasby" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > What I'm looking for is what "\d" provides you, only limited to a > > specific schema. "\d information_schema." (for example) doesn't provide > > that; it provides the details for every table/

Re: [HACKERS] List schema contents

2006-06-09 Thread Tom Lane
"Jim C. Nasby" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > What I'm looking for is what "\d" provides you, only limited to a > specific schema. "\d information_schema." (for example) doesn't provide > that; it provides the details for every table/view in > information_schema. What you're looking for is \dt, or

Re: [HACKERS] List schema contents

2006-06-09 Thread Jim C. Nasby
On Fri, Jun 09, 2006 at 04:20:16PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote: > "Jim C. Nasby" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > I'd like to propose that the behavior of \d schemaname. be changed to > > match > > > set search_path = schemaname > > \d > > I'm not sure what your reasoning is here, but AFAICS this would

Re: [HACKERS] List schema contents

2006-06-09 Thread Tom Lane
"Jim C. Nasby" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > I'd like to propose that the behavior of \d schemaname. be changed to > match > set search_path = schemaname > \d I'm not sure what your reasoning is here, but AFAICS this would move the behavior away from what you say you want. What exactly have you

Re: [HACKERS] List schema contents

2006-06-09 Thread Neil Conway
On Fri, 2006-06-09 at 14:33 -0500, Jim C. Nasby wrote: > Currently, the only way to get a listing of tables in a schema via psql > is to modify your search_path, which is both non-intuitive and a PITA. I've griped about psql's limited support for schemas in the past: http://archives.postgresql.or

Re: [HACKERS] List schema contents

2006-06-09 Thread Martijn van Oosterhout
On Fri, Jun 09, 2006 at 02:33:57PM -0500, Jim C. Nasby wrote: > Currently, the only way to get a listing of tables in a schema via psql > is to modify your search_path, which is both non-intuitive and a PITA. > You can do \d schemaname., but that's the equivalent of Isn't this \dt schemaname.*? T

[HACKERS] List schema contents

2006-06-09 Thread Jim C. Nasby
Currently, the only way to get a listing of tables in a schema via psql is to modify your search_path, which is both non-intuitive and a PITA. You can do \d schemaname., but that's the equivalent of set search_path = schemaname \d * I'd like to propose that the behavior of \d schemaname. be chang