Re: pg14 psql broke \d datname.nspname.relname

From: Mark Dilger <mark(dot)dilger(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)bowt(dot)ie>, Justin Pryzby <pryzby(at)telsasoft(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: pg14 psql broke \d datname.nspname.relname
Date: 2021-10-12 14:37:58
Message-ID: 921F85F5-D7B4-4525-9CA8-FE4CBFCAC149@enterprisedb.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

> On Oct 12, 2021, at 7:30 AM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
>
> If the behavior v14 had implemented were "throw an error if the
> first word doesn't match the current database name", perhaps nobody
> would have questioned it. But that's not what we have. It's fairly
> clear that neither you nor Mark thought very much about this case,
> let alone tested it. Given that, I am not very pleased that you
> are retroactively trying to justify breaking it by claiming that
> it was already broken. It's been that way since 7.3 implemented
> schemas, more or less, and nobody's complained about it. Therefore
> I see little argument for changing that behavior. Changing it in
> an already-released branch is especially suspect.

I completely agree that we need to fix this. My question was only whether "fix" means to make it accept database.schema.table or whether it means to accept any.prefix.at.all.schema.table. It sounds like more people like the latter, so I'll go with that unless this debate rages on and a different conclusion is reached.


Mark Dilger
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Stephen Frost 2021-10-12 14:39:53 Re: storing an explicit nonce
Previous Message Robert Haas 2021-10-12 14:31:56 Re: storing an explicit nonce