| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | "David E(dot) Wheeler" <david(at)kineticode(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: FWD: Re: Updated backslash consistency patch |
| Date: | 2009-01-16 20:16:56 |
| Message-ID: | 11119.1232137016@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> I can't shake the feeling that this is about a couple
> of PostgreSQL hackers (yourself included) not wanting to type \dfS or
> \dfA or something to get the behavior they currently get with \df. If
> that's the case, come off it, because there's lots of evidence on this
> thread (and in all likelihood elsewhere) that this behavior is not
> what end-users want.
As was made clear at the beginning of the thread, that's what they
*think* they want, without any experience with a system that actually
behaves that way. And yes I do believe I know better, both from knowing
how the system works and from actual experience with the ill-considered
patch that's now in HEAD. I'm willing to provide a "U" modifier but
I think it will be a serious error to make that the default behavior.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Peter Eisentraut | 2009-01-16 20:41:03 | Re: PL test fails on several animals |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2009-01-16 20:10:40 | Re: FWD: Re: Updated backslash consistency patch |