From: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Pavel Luzanov <p(dot)luzanov(at)postgrespro(dot)ru> |
Cc: | Wen Yi <wen-yi(at)qq(dot)com>, "David G(dot) Johnston" <david(dot)g(dot)johnston(at)gmail(dot)com>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Jim Nasby <jim(dot)nasby(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Things I don't like about \du's "Attributes" column |
Date: | 2024-05-14 16:03:13 |
Message-ID: | CA+TgmoZc1mtkfFybn10h3-cUm2wTfkaEXU72SCgajR=5eDWyxA@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Tue, Apr 16, 2024 at 3:06 AM Pavel Luzanov <p(dot)luzanov(at)postgrespro(dot)ru> wrote:
> As for the Login column and its values.
> I'm not sure about using "Can" instead of "yes" to represent true.
> In other psql commands, boolean values are always shown as yes/no.
> NULL instead of false might be possible, but I'd rather check if this approach
> has been used elsewhere. I prefer consistency everywhere.
I don't think we can use "Can" to mean "yes". That's going to be
really confusing.
I don't like (irrelevant) either. I know Tom Lane suggested that, but
I think he's got the wrong idea: we should just display the
information we find in the catalogs and let the user decide what is
and isn't relevant. If I see that the connection limit is 40 but the
user can't log in, I can figure out that the value of 40 doesn't
matter. If I see that the connection limit is labelled as (irrelevant)
I don't know why it's labelled that way and, if it were me, I'd likely
end up looking at the source code to figure out why it's showing it
that way.
I think we should go back to the v4 version of this patch, minus the
(ignored) stuff.
--
Robert Haas
EDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2024-05-14 16:06:17 | Re: An improved README experience for PostgreSQL |
Previous Message | Nathan Bossart | 2024-05-14 15:54:48 | Re: An improved README experience for PostgreSQL |