| From: | "scott(dot)marlowe" <scott(dot)marlowe(at)ihs(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Rod Taylor <rbt(at)rbt(dot)ca>, Alvaro Herrera Munoz <alvherre(at)dcc(dot)uchile(dot)cl>, Gaetano Mendola <mendola(at)bigfoot(dot)com>, <pgsql-bugs(at)postgresql(dot)org>, PostgreSQL Development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Ian Barwick <barwick(at)gmx(dot)net> |
| Subject: | Re: [HACKERS] Autocomplete <TAB> on Postgres7.4beta5 not |
| Date: | 2003-10-29 00:34:47 |
| Message-ID: | Pine.LNX.4.33.0310281733230.20240-100000@css120.ihs.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-bugs pgsql-hackers |
On Tue, 28 Oct 2003, Tom Lane wrote:
> "scott.marlowe" <scott(dot)marlowe(at)ihs(dot)com> writes:
> > Is it possible to remove the implicit search path of pg_catalog from a
> > psql session without it breaking lots of stuff?
>
> Do you consider "+", "count()", etc to be important stuff?
Me, hardly ever use them :-) So I can assume that removing the implicit
pg_catalog from the search path is a "bad thing."
In that case, does my proposed solution of having to implicitly include
pg_catalog in your search path to get it to be seen by tab completion as
just another schema make sense?
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Christopher Kings-Lynne | 2003-10-29 01:53:48 | Re: [HACKERS] Autocomplete <TAB> on Postgres7.4beta5 not working? |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2003-10-29 00:24:43 | Re: [HACKERS] Autocomplete <TAB> on Postgres7.4beta5 not working? |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2003-10-29 00:39:54 | Re: Call for port reports |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2003-10-29 00:24:43 | Re: [HACKERS] Autocomplete <TAB> on Postgres7.4beta5 not working? |