Re: Showing parallel status in \df+

Tom Lane wrote:
> Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net> writes:
> > On Friday, July 8, 2016, Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> >> Fujii-san has reminded me of the fact that we do not show in \df+ the
> >> parallel status of a function. The output of \df+ is already very
> >> large, so I guess that any people mentally sane already use it with
> >> the expanded display mode, and it may not matter adding more
> >> information.
> >> Thoughts about adding this piece of information?
>
> > Seems like a good idea to me. It's going to be useful in debugging
>
> If we're going to change \df+ at all, could I lobby for putting the Owner
> column next to Security? They're logically related, and not related to
> Volatility which somehow got crammed between. So I'm imagining the column
> order as
>
> Schema | Name | Result data type | Argument data types | Type | Security | Owner | Volatility | Parallel | Language | Source code | Description
>
> Or maybe Owner then Security.

Agreed.

As a separate concern, IMO having the source code in a \df+ column is
almost completely useless. I propose to split that out to a separate
\df command (say \df% or \df/) that shows *only* the source code.

--
Álvaro Herrera http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services