Peter Eisentraut <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Tom Lane writes:
>> How do you mean "where"?
> I was more wondering where in the source tree to put and how to install
> it. I would suggest the following: I have a file information_schema.sql
> which contains the commands to create the information
Tom Lane writes:
> How do you mean "where"? The spec says it's gotta be called
> information_schema, no? What's left to decide?
I was more wondering where in the source tree to put and how to install
it. I would suggest the following: I have a file information_schema.sql
which contains the co
Peter Eisentraut <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Christopher Kings-Lynne writes:
>> We could do DESCRIBE commands as well. Also, what happened to the
>> INFORMATION_SCHEMA proposal? Wasn't Peter E doing something with that?
>> What happened to it?
> Ooops. Yeah, let's get this in. Where should I
Christopher Kings-Lynne writes:
> We could do DESCRIBE commands as well. Also, what happened to the
> INFORMATION_SCHEMA proposal? Wasn't Peter E doing something with that?
> What happened to it?
Ooops. Yeah, let's get this in. Where should I put it?
--
Peter Eisentraut [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Alvaro Herrera writes:
> Would it work to make \d tab-completable in a way that showed both the
> commands that are available and the objects they describe? e.g.
>
> \d would show something like
> \dt [tables] \ds [sequences] \dv [views] ...
That won't work. The actual completion and the view o
> At 01:25 AM 10/12/2002 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> >Let's
> >get a bit realistic on the ease-of-typing arguments here.
>
> It's a fair cop, but don't forget the memory argument as well - I did say
I
> was happy with \d providing prompts, and DESCRIBE is a little more
> portable & memorable than \d
On Mon, 2002-12-09 at 23:12, Philip Warner wrote:
> At 05:13 PM 9/12/2002 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> >Seems like a fine idea to me.
>
> Ditto.
>
> >"\D" works though.)
> >
> >Any objections out there?
>
> My only complaint here is being forced to use the 'shift' key on commands
> that will be com
Philip Warner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> This would be OK, but I'd be very happy with DESCRIBE, especially if
> tab-completion meant I could type 'DESCTAB' instead of
> 'DESCRIBE TABLE '.
That's quicker than ?
I don't want to sound like I've got some kind of religious objection
to DESCRIBE,
At 01:55 AM 10/12/2002 -0300, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
\d would show something like
\dt [tables]\ds [sequences] \dv [views] ...
(the way it's shown now shows what completions are available, but not
what they mean. Also, both \d and \D should be shown in any case)
This would be OK, but I'd be
> >"\D" works though.)
> >
> >Any objections out there?
>
> My only complaint here is being forced to use the 'shift' key on commands
> that will be common.
\dd perhaps?
---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 1: subscribe and unsubscribe commands go to [EMAI
On Tue, Dec 10, 2002 at 12:55:51PM +1100, Philip Warner wrote:
> At 01:22 PM 9/12/2002 -0800, Christopher Kings-Lynne wrote:
> >Hmmm...I'm not certain that the \d commands really NEED to have a logical
> >link to the actual thing you're listing.
>
> This is the perspective a person with good memor
At 01:22 PM 9/12/2002 -0800, Christopher Kings-Lynne wrote:
Hmmm...I'm not certain that the \d commands really NEED to have a logical
link to the actual thing you're listing.
This is the perspective a person with good memory, unlike me. In find it
useful to be able to derive commands from commo
Christopher Kings-Lynne wrote:
> We could do DESCRIBE commands as well. Also, what happened to the
> INFORMATION_SCHEMA proposal? Wasn't Peter E doing something with that?
> What happened to it?
>
> > The issue here is what do we do with the existing "\d[istvS]" behavior
> > (for instance, "\dsi
At 05:13 PM 9/12/2002 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
Seems like a fine idea to me.
Ditto.
"\D" works though.)
Any objections out there?
My only complaint here is being forced to use the 'shift' key on commands
that will be common. I would prefer any other lower case char: \b, \j, \k ,
\m, \n, \
Hannu Krosing <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Why not use \D for "long" ids ?
Seems like a fine idea to me. (I had actually started to think of
"\s" for "show", but was just observing that that would
create conflicts against existing commands, when your message arrived.
"\D" works though.)
Any obj
Tom Lane kirjutas T, 10.12.2002 kell 02:05:
> [ moved to hackers from pgsql-patches ]
>
> "Christopher Kings-Lynne" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > Peter wrote:
> >> Christopher Kings-Lynne writes:
> >>> \dc - list conversions [PATTERN]
> >>> \dC - list casts
> >>
> >> What are we going to use fo
> ... and that was already proposed for "show schemas" (namespaces).
>
> I'm inclined to think it's time to bite the bullet and go over to
> words rather than single characters to identify the \d target
> (viz, "\dschema", "\dcast", etc, presumably with unique abbreviations
> being allowed, as well
[ moved to hackers from pgsql-patches ]
"Christopher Kings-Lynne" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Peter wrote:
>> Christopher Kings-Lynne writes:
>>> \dc - list conversions [PATTERN]
>>> \dC - list casts
>>
>> What are we going to use for collations?
> \dn Is the only letter left in collations t
18 matches
Mail list logo
