Horton

Re: psql's \d versus included-index-column feature

Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@2ndquadrant.com>

View thread View on postgr.es
From: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@2ndquadrant.com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Cc: "David G. Johnston" <david.g.johnston@gmail.com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org>
Date: 2018-07-18T21:05:44Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers 
On 2018-Jul-18, Tom Lane wrote:

> I can sympathize with the eyestrain argument against t/f, but the
> above doesn't seem like an improvement --- in particular, "Data"
> as the column header seems quite content-free.  My counterproposal
> is to keep "Key" as the header and use "Yes"/"No" as the values.

I think "Key: no" is a bit obscure -- using "included" is a bit more
self-documenting and lends better to documentation searches.

> I'd be OK with "Key"/"Included" as the values if someone can
> propose an on-point column header to go with those.

"Role"?

-- 
Álvaro Herrera                https://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services

Commits

  1. Fix pg_get_indexdef()'s behavior for included index columns.

  2. Improve psql's \d command to show whether index columns are key columns.