From: Kyotaro Horiguchi <horikyota.ntt@gmail.com>
To: alvherre@2ndquadrant.com
Cc: a.korotkov@postgrespro.ru
Cc: andres@anarazel.de
Cc: n.gluhov@postgrespro.ru
Cc: thomas.munro@gmail.com
Cc: pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
Cc: david@pgmasters.net
Cc: michael@paquier.xyz
Subject: Re: Psql patch to show access methods info
Date: Thu, 19 Sep 2019 18:47:08 +0900 (Tokyo Standard Time)
Message-ID: <20190919.184708.25203401.horikyota.ntt@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20190918140440.GA28323@alvherre.pgsql>
References: <CAPpHfdvO91yfV9jSE228u_qkd2=YZCNLYH2YT6LBdRJO2wdZAA@mail.gmail.com>
<20190918140440.GA28323@alvherre.pgsql>
Hello. FWIW..
At Wed, 18 Sep 2019 11:04:40 -0300, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@2ndquadrant.com> wrote in <20190918140440.GA28323@alvherre.pgsql>
> I think in order for this feature to be more complete "\d index" should
> show the opfamily name, also, even when it's the default one. (Let's
> not put the opfamily when it's the default in "\d table", as we do when
> the opfamily is not default; that would lead, I think, to too much
> clutter.)
>
> > > On the other hand, from a user perspective, what you really want to know
> > > is: what opfamilies exist for datatype T, and what operators are
> > > supported by the opfamily I have chosen? The current patch doesn't
> > > really help you find that out.
I have thought that several times.
> I hope that in some future somebody will contribute towards this, which
> I think is more important (from users POV) than the below one:
>
> > > I think \dAp isn't terribly informative from a user perspective. The
> > > support procs are just an opfamily implementation detail.
> >
> > I've expressed my opinion regarding \dAp in [1]. In my observations,
> > some advanced users can write btree/hash opclasses in pl/* languages.
> > This doesn't require knowledge of core developer. And they may find
> > \dAp command useful. What do you think?
>
> I have never tried or had the need to do that. I'll take your word for
> it, so I have no objection.
>
> I do wonder if \? is going to end up with too much clutter, and if so do
> we need to make \? show only the most important commands and relegate
> some others to \?+ ... however, going over the existing \? I see no
> command that I would move to \?+ so \dAp would be alone there, which
> would be pretty strange. So let's forget this angle for now; but if
> psql acquires too much "system innards" functionality then I say we
> should consider it.
Before the fact that usable slot of two-letter commands is almost
filled, my poor memory rejects to remember the commands that is
used infrequently.. ctrl-I suggests many two-or-three letter
meta commands but I can't tell what is the command I'm searching
for. \? shows too many commands as you mentioned.
If something like "\? | grep index" works, it would be helpful.
regards.
--
Kyotaro Horiguchi
NTT Open Source Software Center
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Reply to all the recipients using the --to and --cc options:
reply via email
To: pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
Cc: horikyota.ntt@gmail.com, alvherre@2ndquadrant.com, a.korotkov@postgrespro.ru, andres@anarazel.de, n.gluhov@postgrespro.ru, thomas.munro@gmail.com, david@pgmasters.net, michael@paquier.xyz
Subject: Re: Psql patch to show access methods info
In-Reply-To: <20190919.184708.25203401.horikyota.ntt@gmail.com>
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
This inbox is served by DDX for PostgreSQL; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox