From: | Alexander Korotkov <a(dot)korotkov(at)postgrespro(dot)ru> |
---|---|
To: | Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> |
Cc: | Nikita Glukhov <n(dot)gluhov(at)postgrespro(dot)ru>, Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Kyotaro HORIGUCHI <horiguchi(dot)kyotaro(at)lab(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp>, David Steele <david(at)pgmasters(dot)net>, Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
Subject: | Re: Psql patch to show access methods info |
Date: | 2019-08-05 23:57:10 |
Message-ID: | CAPpHfdsvVxC+MF-JQp-GFq4xQQ-DhUDrLizK+OSAhr_VFpsp1w@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, Jul 24, 2019 at 4:59 PM Alexander Korotkov
<a(dot)korotkov(at)postgrespro(dot)ru> wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 24, 2019 at 9:01 AM Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> wrote:
> > Based on a quick skim of the thread - which means I most definitely
> > missed things - there's not been discussion of why we actually want to
> > add this. Who's the prospective user of this facility? And why wouldn't
> > they just query pg_am[proc]? None of this information seems like it's
> > going to be even remotely targeted towards even advanced users. For
> > developers it's not clear what these add?
>
> I see your point regarding pg_am details. Probably nobody expect
> developers need this. And probably even developers don't need this,
> because it's easier to see IndexAmRoutine directly with more details.
> So, +1 for removing this.
>
> pg_amproc for gin/gist/sp-gist/brin is probably for developers. But I
> think pg_amproc for btree/hash could be useful for advanced users.
> btree/hash opclasses could be written by advanced users using
> pl/something, I've faced that several times.
Revised patch is attached. Changes to \dA+ command are reverted. It
also contains some minor improvements.
Second patch looks problematic for me, because it provides index
description alternative to \d+. IMHO, if there is something really
useful to display about index, we should keep it in \d+. So, I
propose to postpone this.
------
Alexander Korotkov
Postgres Professional: http://www.postgrespro.com
The Russian Postgres Company
Attachment | Content-Type | Size |
---|---|---|
0001-Add-psql-AM-info-commands-v09.patch | application/octet-stream | 24.7 KB |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tatsuo Ishii | 2019-08-06 00:25:02 | Re: Implementing Incremental View Maintenance |
Previous Message | Robert Haas | 2019-08-05 23:37:33 | Re: POC: Cleaning up orphaned files using undo logs |