| From: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Jim Nasby <Jim(dot)Nasby(at)bluetreble(dot)com>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Pavel Stehule <pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com>, Rushabh Lathia <rushabh(dot)lathia(at)gmail(dot)com>, Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net>, Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com>, Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net>, PostgreSQL mailing lists <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Masao Fujii <masao(dot)fujii(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Subject: | Re: Showing parallel status in \df+ |
| Date: | 2016-10-03 19:54:13 |
| Message-ID: | CA+TgmoaPCBUGF7yTcjmiU=m2Sgo8jaNtnkHmTm1xKoaR5UQgoQ@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Fri, Sep 30, 2016 at 8:47 PM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> Well, alternatively, can we get a consensus for doing that? People
> did speak against removing PL source code from \df+ altogether, but
> maybe they're willing to reconsider if the alternative is doing nothing.
>
> Personally I'm on the edge of washing my hands of the whole thing...
The hand-washing strategy has a lot to recommend it; this thread is
going nowhere fast. I don't care enough to put up a big stink about
the idea of removing PL source code from \df+ output, but it's not
what I'd choose to do; let's call me -0 on that option.
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Gilles Darold | 2016-10-03 19:54:41 | Re: proposal: psql \setfileref |
| Previous Message | Robert Haas | 2016-10-03 19:50:28 | Re: "Re: Question about grant create on database and pg_dump/pg_dumpall |