Re: Remove source code display from \df+?

On Sun, 22 Jan 2023 at 16:56, Justin Pryzby <pryzby(at)telsasoft(dot)com> wrote:

> On Sun, Jan 22, 2023 at 03:04:14PM -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
>

> That's excessive. The policy Alvaro mentions applies to globally-visible
> > object names (i.e., database, role, and tablespace names), and it's there
> > to try to ensure that doing "make installcheck" against a live
> > installation won't clobber any non-test-created objects. There's no
> point
> > in having such a policy within a test database --- its most likely effect
> > there would be to increase the risk that different test scripts step on
> > each others' toes. If you feel a need for a name prefix for non-global
> > objects, use something based on the name of your test script.
>
> But we *are* talking about the role to be created to allow stable output
> of \df+ , so it's necessary to name it "regress_*". To appease
> ENFORCE_REGRESSION_TEST_NAME_RESTRICTIONS, and to avoid clobbering
> global objects during "installcheck".
>

Tom is talking about my informal policy of prefixing all objects. Only
global objects need to be prefixed with regress_, but I prefixed everything
I created (functions as well as the role). I actually called the
role regress_psql_df and used that entire role name as the prefix of my
function names, so I think it unlikely that I’ll collide with anything else.