| From: | David Zhang <david(dot)zhang(at)highgo(dot)ca> |
|---|---|
| To: | "David G(dot) Johnston" <david(dot)g(dot)johnston(at)gmail(dot)com>, Pavel Luzanov <p(dot)luzanov(at)postgrespro(dot)ru> |
| Cc: | "pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: psql: Add role's membership options to the \du+ command |
| Date: | 2023-02-15 22:52:20 |
| Message-ID: | e79436ce-2321-8ec3-7eab-a8e352ec7085@highgo.ca |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 2023-02-15 1:37 p.m., David G. Johnston wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 15, 2023 at 2:31 PM David Zhang <david(dot)zhang(at)highgo(dot)ca> wrote:
>
> There is a default built-in role `pg_monitor` and the behavior
> changed after the patch. If `\dg+` and `\du+` is treated as the
> same, and `make check` all pass, then I assume there is no test
> case to verify the output of `duS+`. My point is should we
> consider add a test case?
>
> I mean, either you accept the change in how this meta-command presents
> its information or you don't. I don't see how a test case is
> particularly beneficial. Or, at least the pg_monitor role is not
> special in this regard. Alice changed too and you don't seem to be
> including it in your complaint.
Good improvement, +1.
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Peter Smith | 2023-02-15 23:13:35 | Re: [PATCH] Add pretty-printed XML output option |
| Previous Message | Michael Paquier | 2023-02-15 22:46:30 | Re: [EXTERNAL] Re: [PATCH] Support using "all" for the db user in pg_ident.conf |