From: | vignesh C <vignesh21(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz> |
Cc: | Kyotaro Horiguchi <horikyota(dot)ntt(at)gmail(dot)com>, mths(dot)dev(at)pm(dot)me, pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: mprove tab completion for ALTER EXTENSION ADD/DROP |
Date: | 2023-01-11 16:59:25 |
Message-ID: | CALDaNm2Tjb6dwAVNr0WbE4wa8TG4VzcngO3CzRNLupG8bkmG4g@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, 11 Jan 2023 at 12:19, Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz> wrote:
>
> On Wed, Jan 11, 2023 at 12:10:33PM +0900, Kyotaro Horiguchi wrote:
> > It suggests the *kinds* of objects that are part of the extension, but
> > lists the objects of that kind regardless of dependency. I read
> > Michael suggested (and I agree) to restrict the objects (not kinds) to
> > actually be a part of the extension. (And not for object kinds.)
>
> Yeah, that's what I meant. Now, if Vignesh does not want to extend
> that, that's fine for me as well at the end on second thought, as this
> involves much more code for each DROP path depending on the object
> type involved.
>
> Adding the object names after DROP/ADD is useful on its own, and we
> already have some completion once the object type is specified, so
> simpler is perhaps just better here.
I too felt keeping it simpler is better. How about using the simple
first version of patch itself?
Regards,
Vignesh
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Gilles Darold | 2023-01-11 16:59:59 | [Proposal] Allow pg_dump to include all child tables with the root table |
Previous Message | Andres Freund | 2023-01-11 16:52:15 | Re: Minimal logical decoding on standbys |