Re: Strange "missing tables" problem

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Denis BUCHER <dbucherml(at)hsolutions(dot)ch>
Cc: Guillaume Lelarge <guillaume(at)lelarge(dot)info>, pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Strange "missing tables" problem
Date: 2009-08-24 14:39:54
Message-ID: 11453.1251124794@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general

Denis BUCHER <dbucherml(at)hsolutions(dot)ch> writes:
> Yes that's correct. Therefore my "problem" is the "normal" behavior of
> \dt. But "normal" means "expected". But I don't find it very
> secure/handy, because you expect to see all your tables. Is there a way
> to change the behavior of \dt so that it lists ALL tables present in
> search path ?

It *is* the expected behavior. The idea is that "\dt foo" should
describe the same table that "select * from foo" would find.
If you want to see all the possible matches for foo, use "\dt *.foo".

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Thomas Kellerer 2009-08-24 15:47:56 Re: Getting listed on "Community Guide to PostgreSQL GUI Tools"
Previous Message dev mas 2009-08-24 14:19:34 unsubscribe