| From: | Phil Sorber <phil(at)omniti(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Jon Erdman <postgresql(at)thewickedtribe(dot)net> |
| Cc: | PostgreSQL-development Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net>, Pavel Stehule <pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Subject: | Re: My first patch! (to \df output) |
| Date: | 2013-01-19 17:00:18 |
| Message-ID: | CADAkt-ja_FBFr3nJO8ou-8_X41rV=XQ1P13DqiSa0CDoOLPq1Q@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Jan 19, 2013 10:55 AM, "Jon Erdman" <postgresql(at)thewickedtribe(dot)net>
wrote:
>
>
> I did realize that since I moved it to + the doc should change, but I
didn't address that. I'll get on it this weekend.
>
> As far as the column name and displayed values go, they're taken from the
CREATE FUNCTION syntax, and were recommended by Magnus, Bruce, and Fetter,
who were all sitting next to me day after pgconf.eu Prague. I personally
have no strong feelings either way, I just want to be able to see the info
without having to directly query pg_proc. Whatever you all agree on is fine
by me.
Sounds like you have a +4/-1 on the names then. I'd keep them as is.
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Dimitri Fontaine | 2013-01-19 17:05:02 | Re: Passing connection string to pg_basebackup |
| Previous Message | Pavel Stehule | 2013-01-19 16:58:29 | Re: proposal: fix corner use case of variadic fuctions usage |