From: | "Brendan Jurd" <direvus(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | "Chris Browne" <cbbrowne(at)acm(dot)org> |
Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: psql show dbsize? |
Date: | 2007-11-01 03:12:18 |
Message-ID: | 37ed240d0710312012x2c472120s3eebba5d431ebf93@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 11/1/07, Chris Browne <cbbrowne(at)acm(dot)org> wrote:
> tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us (Tom Lane) writes:
> > Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> writes:
> >> Perhaps both these considerations dictate providing another command or a
> >> special flavor of \l instead of just modifying it?
> >
> > I've seen no argument made why \l should print this info at all.
>
> Its interesting information, but I agree that there are BIG
> disadvantages to adding it to \l directly. If there's an "\lv" or
> such, where it's more certain that people want extended information,
> and perhaps that they have appropriate permissions.
I'd find this convenient too. Although \l+ would be more consistent
with the \d series of commands.
Cheers
BJ
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2007-11-01 03:33:46 | Re: psql show dbsize? |
Previous Message | andy | 2007-11-01 02:18:55 | Re: psql show dbsize? |