SHOW TABLES
in [PgSql]
|
From: Bruce Momjian on 16 Jul 2010 13:49 Chris Browne wrote: > - I'd sure like to be able to write queries that *don't* involve > array smashing or using "grep" on \z output to analyze object > permissions. The \z output is an embarrassment, no question about it in my mind. -- Bruce Momjian <bruce(a)momjian.us> http://momjian.us EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com + None of us is going to be here forever. + -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers(a)postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
From: Heikki Linnakangas on 16 Jul 2010 13:52 On 16/07/10 20:11, Rob Wultsch wrote: > On Fri, Jul 16, 2010 at 9:56 AM, Robert Haas<robertmhaas(a)gmail.com> wrote: >> For committers. > > Perhaps this discussions should be moved to the General list in order > to poll the userbase. > > My .02 is that SHOW commands (even if they are not compatible) would > make it much easier for me to make an argument to my boss to at least > consider moving off another open source database. The show commands > are in *very* widespread use by the MySQL community even after ~5 > years of having the i_s. The Drizzle team (a radical fork of MySQL) > very briefly considered removing the SHOW commands and the unanimous > objections that followed caused that idea to scrapped. That's for MySQL. I come from a DB2 background, and when I started using psql years ago, I often typed "LIST TABLES" without thinking much about it. Not SHOW TABLES, but LIST TABLES. I bet Oracle users coming to PostgreSQL will try "DESC". Not SHOW TABLES. As Simon listed, every DBMS out there has a different syntax for this. I have nothing against SHOW TABLES (it might cause conflicts in grammar though), but if we're going to cater to people migrating from MySQL, I feel we should cater to people migrating from other products too. But surely we're not going to implement 10 different syntaxes for the same thing! We could, however, give a hint in the syntax error in all those cases. That way we're not on the hook to maintain them forever, and we will be doing people a favor by introducing them to the backslash commands or information schema, which are more powerful. -- Heikki Linnakangas EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers(a)postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
From: Rob Wultsch on 16 Jul 2010 14:27 On Fri, Jul 16, 2010 at 10:52 AM, Heikki Linnakangas <heikki.linnakangas(a)enterprisedb.com> wrote: > On 16/07/10 20:11, Rob Wultsch wrote: >> >> On Fri, Jul 16, 2010 at 9:56 AM, Robert Haas<robertmhaas(a)gmail.com> >> �wrote: >>> >>> For committers. >> >> Perhaps this discussions should be moved to the General list in order >> to poll the userbase. >> >> My .02 is that SHOW commands (even if they are not compatible) would >> make it much easier for me to make an argument to my boss to at least >> consider moving off another open source database. The show commands >> are in *very* widespread use by the MySQL community even after ~5 >> years of having the i_s. The Drizzle team (a radical fork of MySQL) >> very briefly considered removing the SHOW commands and the unanimous >> objections that followed caused that idea to scrapped. > > That's for MySQL. I come from a DB2 background, and when I started using > psql years ago, I often typed "LIST TABLES" without thinking much about it. > Not SHOW TABLES, but LIST TABLES. > > I bet Oracle users coming to PostgreSQL will try "DESC". Not SHOW TABLES. As > Simon listed, every DBMS out there has a different syntax for this. > > I have nothing against SHOW TABLES (it might cause conflicts in grammar > though), but if we're going to cater to people migrating from MySQL, I feel > we should cater to people migrating from other products too. But surely > we're not going to implement 10 different syntaxes for the same thing! We > could, however, give a hint in the syntax error in all those cases. That way > we're not on the hook to maintain them forever, and we will be doing people > a favor by introducing them to the backslash commands or information schema, > which are more powerful. > > -- > �Heikki Linnakangas > �EnterpriseDB � http://www.enterprisedb.com > desc[ribe] also works in MySQL. Perhaps describe would be a good option: describe tables describe table <table name> (or perhaps descrive <object>?) describe schemas etc -- Rob Wultsch wultsch(a)gmail.com -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers(a)postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
From: Simon Riggs on 16 Jul 2010 14:32 On Fri, 2010-07-16 at 20:52 +0300, Heikki Linnakangas wrote: > On 16/07/10 20:11, Rob Wultsch wrote: > > On Fri, Jul 16, 2010 at 9:56 AM, Robert Haas<robertmhaas(a)gmail.com> wrote: > >> For committers. > > > > Perhaps this discussions should be moved to the General list in order > > to poll the userbase. > > > > My .02 is that SHOW commands (even if they are not compatible) would > > make it much easier for me to make an argument to my boss to at least > > consider moving off another open source database. The show commands > > are in *very* widespread use by the MySQL community even after ~5 > > years of having the i_s. The Drizzle team (a radical fork of MySQL) > > very briefly considered removing the SHOW commands and the unanimous > > objections that followed caused that idea to scrapped. > > That's for MySQL. I come from a DB2 background, and when I started using > psql years ago, I often typed "LIST TABLES" without thinking much about > it. Not SHOW TABLES, but LIST TABLES. > I bet Oracle users coming to PostgreSQL will try "DESC". Not SHOW > TABLES. As Simon listed, every DBMS out there has a different syntax for > this. Agreed > I have nothing against SHOW TABLES ....but SHOW wins, based on numbers of people expecting that > (it might cause conflicts in grammar > though) We don't have t handle it in the grammar. There are no parameters called "tables", "databases" etc > , but if we're going to cater to people migrating from MySQL, I > feel we should cater to people migrating from other products too. But > surely we're not going to implement 10 different syntaxes for the same > thing! We could, however, give a hint in the syntax error in all those > cases. That's a very sensible suggestion, we should give a hint for all common commands SHOW, LIST, etc., even though we pick just one to implement. > That way we're not on the hook to maintain them forever, and we > will be > doing people a favor by introducing them to the backslash > commands That's a sentence I never thought to see written down > or information schema, which are more powerful. and this in no way detracts from that power and standardisation. -- Simon Riggs www.2ndQuadrant.com PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training and Services -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers(a)postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
From: Heikki Linnakangas on 16 Jul 2010 15:16
On 16/07/10 21:32, Simon Riggs wrote: > On Fri, 2010-07-16 at 20:52 +0300, Heikki Linnakangas wrote: >> I have nothing against SHOW TABLES > > ...but SHOW wins, based on numbers of people expecting that I'm not sure I buy that, but even if it's true, it doesn't seem fair to do a favor to one group of users, leaving the rest stranded and excluded forever. Even if SHOW TABLES has a bigger mind-share than the others, surely the others are not negligible either. >> , but if we're going to cater to people migrating from MySQL, I >> feel we should cater to people migrating from other products too. But >> surely we're not going to implement 10 different syntaxes for the same >> thing! We could, however, give a hint in the syntax error in all those >> cases. > > That's a very sensible suggestion, we should give a hint for all common > commands SHOW, LIST, etc., even though we pick just one to implement. I'm suggesting that we should just add the hint for all of those and be done with it. >> doing people a favor by introducing them to the backslash >> commands > > That's a sentence I never thought to see written down :-). They're not that bad IMHO. \d is short, which is nice. \d and \df are the commands I routinely use and remember, for anything more advanced I have to resort to \h. The SHOW TABLES command wouldn't do more than that anyway. -- Heikki Linnakangas EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers(a)postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers |