SHOW TABLES
in [PgSql]
|
From: Tim Landscheidt on 16 Jul 2010 16:35 Simon Riggs <simon(a)2ndQuadrant.com> wrote: > [...] > Light switches are usually at shoulder height next to a door. Our light > switches are 2 metres up, on the far side of the room. People are sick > of banging their knees on furniture while trying to grope for the light. > The light switch isn't so much hard to use, its just in the wrong place. > We must envisage what it is to be a person that doesn't know where the > switch is, or have forgotten. We don't need a programmable light switch > API, or a multi-function light remote control. Just a switch by all of > the doors. > (Oh, they're probably not called lights outside UK; room lamps maybe?) Wow, the British must have shrunk a lot since my last vis- it - here light switches are mounted not more than 105 cm from the floor :-) (barrier-free not more than 85 cm). I guess the problem shown by others in this thread is that there doesn't seem to be a "usually" with regard to "\d" equivalents either. Tim -- 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: "Joshua D. Drake" on 16 Jul 2010 17:26 On Fri, 2010-07-16 at 19:32 +0100, Simon Riggs wrote: > 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 No kidding. We are not helping users by introducing them to \d commands. I will repeat what I said at the beginning of this postgres vs. postgresql thread: Yes. We should provide a single, well described grammar for interacting with objects in the database regardless of client. I should be able to open ANY SQL terminal, and type SHOW ME THE MONEY and have Benjamins fall out. The discussions of \ commands and psql are irrelevant to this thread. Joshua D. Drake -- PostgreSQL.org Major Contributor Command Prompt, Inc: http://www.commandprompt.com/ - 509.416.6579 Consulting, Training, Support, Custom Development, Engineering -- 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: Brendan Jurd on 16 Jul 2010 17:36 On 17 July 2010 07:26, Joshua D. Drake <jd(a)commandprompt.com> wrote: > Yes. We should provide a single, well described grammar for interacting > with objects in the database regardless of client. I should be able to > open ANY SQL terminal, and type SHOW ME THE MONEY and have Benjamins > fall out. postgres=# SHOW ME THE MONEY; WARNING: THE MONEY is deprecated in this version of Postgres and may be discarded in a future version HINT: Use SHOW ME THE NUMERIC with the desired precision instead. -- 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: "Joshua D. Drake" on 16 Jul 2010 17:38 On Sat, 2010-07-17 at 07:36 +1000, Brendan Jurd wrote: > On 17 July 2010 07:26, Joshua D. Drake <jd(a)commandprompt.com> wrote: > > Yes. We should provide a single, well described grammar for interacting > > with objects in the database regardless of client. I should be able to > > open ANY SQL terminal, and type SHOW ME THE MONEY and have Benjamins > > fall out. > > postgres=# SHOW ME THE MONEY; > WARNING: THE MONEY is deprecated in this version of Postgres and may > be discarded in a future version > HINT: Use SHOW ME THE NUMERIC with the desired precision instead. Funny, but no longer true: http://www.postgresql.org/docs/8.4/static/datatype-money.html (although I wish we would get rid of the type) JD > -- PostgreSQL.org Major Contributor Command Prompt, Inc: http://www.commandprompt.com/ - 509.416.6579 Consulting, Training, Support, Custom Development, Engineering -- 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: Stephen Frost on 16 Jul 2010 17:39
* Heikki Linnakangas (heikki.linnakangas(a)enterprisedb.com) wrote: > 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. Have to say that I don't believe we're under any obligation to be "fair" to the users of various other RDBMS'. I hate MySQL with a passion, and originally came from an Oracle background, but I have to say that 'show tables;' makes a heck of alot more sense to me than 'desc'. > I'm suggesting that we should just add the hint for all of those and be > done with it. I do think it'd be useful to have a top-level set of 'show' commands. I agree with the others that the approach of saying "well, if you just query pg_class joined against pg_namespace and filter out what you don't want", etc, etc, is way more complicated than it really needs to be. I can think of some applications where I would have actually used it (simple perl scripts and the like). I'm not sure how I feel about something like "select * from (show tables) where table_name = 'blah';"... > :-). 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. I don't find them all that bad either, really. I do find myself doing things like "psql -c '\d';" in scripts and whatnot on occation, which isn't exactly ideal either. :) Thanks, Stephen |