Horton
Menu

Thread

Commits

Same data as JSON: GET /api/v1/messages/:b64id/commits the thread's linked commits as JSON, with link sources. API reference →

  1. psql: Improve describe footer titles for publications.

  2. Fix capitalization in publication describe output.

  3. Allow table exclusions in publications via EXCEPT TABLE.

  1. EXCEPT TABLE - Case inconsistency for describe \d and \dRp+

    Peter Smith <smithpb2250@gmail.com> — 2026-04-10T07:13:15Z

    Hi.

While experimenting with "CREATE PUBLICATION ... FOR ALL TABLES EXCEPT
(TABLE...)" I noticed a small "case" inconsistency.

Background: The \d and \dRp+ command were enhanced in commit fd36606
[1][2] to say what tables are excluded from what publications.

e.g.

# -- describe the publications
# \dRp+ pub1
                                                     Publication pub1
Owner   | All tables | All sequences | Inserts | Updates | Deletes |
Truncates | Generated columns | Via root | Description
----------+------------+---------------+---------+---------+---------+-----------+-------------------+----------+-------------
postgres | t          | f             | t       | t      | t       | t
        | none              | f        |

Except tables:
  "public.t1"
  "public.t2"

# \dRp+ pub2
                                                     Publication pub2
Owner   | All tables | All sequences | Inserts | Updates | Deletes |
Truncates | Generated columns | Via root | Description
----------+------------+---------------+---------+---------+---------+-----------+-------------------+----------+-------------
postgres | f          | f             | t       | t      | t       | t
        | none              | f        |
Tables:
  "public.t2"
  "public.t3"

# -- describe the tables
# \d t1
                Table "public.t1"
Column | Type   | Collation | Nullable | Default
--------+---------+-----------+----------+---------
a      | integer |           |          |
Except Publications:
  "pub1"

# \d t2
                Table "public.t2"
Column | Type   | Collation | Nullable | Default
--------+---------+-----------+----------+---------
a      | integer |           |          |

Publications:
  "pub2"
Except Publications:
  "pub1"

~~~

Notice that that the describe publication says:
"Tables:" and "Except tables:" (Lowercase "tables")

Notice that the describe table says:
"Publications:" and "Except Publications:"  (Uppercase "Publications")

I think they should use a consistent case:
eg1. (both lowercase) Except tables; Except publications, OR
eg2. (bother uppercase) Except Tables; Except Publications

~~~

I did not yet provide a patch because I was not sure which way
(uppercase/lowercase) is best, so wanted to hear some opinions about
that first.

(I'm expecting that some DOCS examples and/or TESTS for "describe"
will also be impacted).

Thoughts?

======
[1] https://github.com/postgres/postgres/commit/fd366065e06ae953c4f2d973d5c5f0474f3b87b6#diff-cdb325f8994210a4cfacc19525f11e9b368a3f78641b67105c105449df9b645cR6859
[2] https://github.com/postgres/postgres/commit/fd366065e06ae953c4f2d973d5c5f0474f3b87b6#diff-cdb325f8994210a4cfacc19525f11e9b368a3f78641b67105c105449df9b645cR3183

Kind Regards,
Peter Smith.
Fujitsu Australia

  2. Re: EXCEPT TABLE - Case inconsistency for describe \d and \dRp+

    Amit Kapila <amit.kapila16@gmail.com> — 2026-04-10T10:19:34Z

    On Fri, Apr 10, 2026 at 12:43 PM Peter Smith <smithpb2250@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Notice that that the describe publication says:
> "Tables:" and "Except tables:" (Lowercase "tables")
>
> Notice that the describe table says:
> "Publications:" and "Except Publications:"  (Uppercase "Publications")
>
> I think they should use a consistent case:
> eg1. (both lowercase) Except tables; Except publications, OR
> eg2. (bother uppercase) Except Tables; Except Publications
>

We should follow eg1. I checked few examples where we follow same
pattern as eg1:

Example-1: (See: "Tables from schemas")
 postgres=# \dRp+ pub1
                                                     Publication pub1
 Owner | All tables | All sequences | Inserts | Updates | Deletes |
Truncates | Generated columns | Via root | Description
-------+------------+---------------+---------+---------+---------+-----------+-------------------+----------+-------------
 amit  | f          | f             | t       | t       | t       | t
       | none              | f        |
Tables from schemas:
    "sch1"

Example-2: ((See: "No connections")
postgres=# create user u1 CONNECTION LIMIT 0;
CREATE ROLE
postgres=# \du u1
       List of roles
 Role name |   Attributes
-----------+----------------
 u1        | No connections

-- 
With Regards,
Amit Kapila.

  3. Re: EXCEPT TABLE - Case inconsistency for describe \d and \dRp+

    Peter Smith <smithpb2250@gmail.com> — 2026-04-13T02:14:59Z

    On Fri, Apr 10, 2026 at 8:19 PM Amit Kapila <amit.kapila16@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On Fri, Apr 10, 2026 at 12:43 PM Peter Smith <smithpb2250@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > Notice that that the describe publication says:
> > "Tables:" and "Except tables:" (Lowercase "tables")
> >
> > Notice that the describe table says:
> > "Publications:" and "Except Publications:"  (Uppercase "Publications")
> >
> > I think they should use a consistent case:
> > eg1. (both lowercase) Except tables; Except publications, OR
> > eg2. (bother uppercase) Except Tables; Except Publications
> >
>
> We should follow eg1. I checked few examples where we follow same
> pattern as eg1:
>
> Example-1: (See: "Tables from schemas")
>  postgres=# \dRp+ pub1
>                                                      Publication pub1
>  Owner | All tables | All sequences | Inserts | Updates | Deletes |
> Truncates | Generated columns | Via root | Description
> -------+------------+---------------+---------+---------+---------+-----------+-------------------+----------+-------------
>  amit  | f          | f             | t       | t       | t       | t
>        | none              | f        |
> Tables from schemas:
>     "sch1"
>
> Example-2: ((See: "No connections")
> postgres=# create user u1 CONNECTION LIMIT 0;
> CREATE ROLE
> postgres=# \du u1
>        List of roles
>  Role name |   Attributes
> -----------+----------------
>  u1        | No connections
>

Hi Amit.

Thanks for the advice.

PSA patch v1 to change "Except Publications" to "Except publications".

======
Kind Regards,
Peter Smith.
Fujitsu Australia

  4. Re: EXCEPT TABLE - Case inconsistency for describe \d and \dRp+

    vignesh C <vignesh21@gmail.com> — 2026-04-13T03:21:06Z

    On Mon, 13 Apr 2026 at 07:45, Peter Smith <smithpb2250@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On Fri, Apr 10, 2026 at 8:19 PM Amit Kapila <amit.kapila16@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > On Fri, Apr 10, 2026 at 12:43 PM Peter Smith <smithpb2250@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > Notice that that the describe publication says:
> > > "Tables:" and "Except tables:" (Lowercase "tables")
> > >
> > > Notice that the describe table says:
> > > "Publications:" and "Except Publications:"  (Uppercase "Publications")
> > >
> > > I think they should use a consistent case:
> > > eg1. (both lowercase) Except tables; Except publications, OR
> > > eg2. (bother uppercase) Except Tables; Except Publications
> > >
> >
> > We should follow eg1. I checked few examples where we follow same
> > pattern as eg1:
> >
> > Example-1: (See: "Tables from schemas")
> >  postgres=# \dRp+ pub1
> >                                                      Publication pub1
> >  Owner | All tables | All sequences | Inserts | Updates | Deletes |
> > Truncates | Generated columns | Via root | Description
> > -------+------------+---------------+---------+---------+---------+-----------+-------------------+----------+-------------
> >  amit  | f          | f             | t       | t       | t       | t
> >        | none              | f        |
> > Tables from schemas:
> >     "sch1"
> >
> > Example-2: ((See: "No connections")
> > postgres=# create user u1 CONNECTION LIMIT 0;
> > CREATE ROLE
> > postgres=# \du u1
> >        List of roles
> >  Role name |   Attributes
> > -----------+----------------
> >  u1        | No connections
> >
>
> Hi Amit.
>
> Thanks for the advice.
>
> PSA patch v1 to change "Except Publications" to "Except publications".

The commit message could be improved:
Date: Mon, 13 Apr 2026 12:12:00 +1000
Subject: [PATCH v1] describe table except publications

---
 src/bin/psql/describe.c                   | 2 +-

Other than that, the patch looks good to me.

Regards,
Vignesh.

  5. Re: EXCEPT TABLE - Case inconsistency for describe \d and \dRp+

    Peter Smith <smithpb2250@gmail.com> — 2026-04-13T05:23:48Z

    On Mon, Apr 13, 2026 at 1:21 PM vignesh C <vignesh21@gmail.com> wrote:
>
...
> The commit message could be improved:
> Date: Mon, 13 Apr 2026 12:12:00 +1000
> Subject: [PATCH v1] describe table except publications
>
> ---
>  src/bin/psql/describe.c                   | 2 +-
>
> Other than that, the patch looks good to me.
>

Hi Vignesh.

Thanks for the review.

PSA patch v2. It is the same as v1, but with an improved commit message,

======
Kind Regards,
Peter Smith.
Fujitsu Australia

  6. Re: EXCEPT TABLE - Case inconsistency for describe \d and \dRp+

    Peter Smith <smithpb2250@gmail.com> — 2026-04-14T00:03:47Z

    On Mon, Apr 13, 2026 at 3:23 PM Peter Smith <smithpb2250@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On Mon, Apr 13, 2026 at 1:21 PM vignesh C <vignesh21@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> ...
> > The commit message could be improved:
> > Date: Mon, 13 Apr 2026 12:12:00 +1000
> > Subject: [PATCH v1] describe table except publications
> >
> > ---
> >  src/bin/psql/describe.c                   | 2 +-
> >
> > Other than that, the patch looks good to me.
> >
>
> Hi Vignesh.
>
> Thanks for the review.
>
> PSA patch v2. It is the same as v1, but with an improved commit message,
>

Hi Amit. Thanks for pushing.

======
Kind Regards
Peter Smith.
Fujitsu Australia

  7. Re: EXCEPT TABLE - Case inconsistency for describe \d and \dRp+

    Álvaro Herrera <alvherre@kurilemu.de> — 2026-04-16T14:10:33Z

    On 2026-Apr-10, Peter Smith wrote:

> # -- describe the tables
> # \d t1
>                 Table "public.t1"
> Column | Type   | Collation | Nullable | Default
> --------+---------+-----------+----------+---------
> a      | integer |           |          |
> Except Publications:
>   "pub1"

I have a hard time understanding what an "except publication" is.  I
think this would be clearer if the header said "Excluded from publications:"


A footer section under a publication saying "Except tables" on the other
hand is crystal clear.

-- 
Álvaro Herrera        Breisgau, Deutschland  —  https://www.EnterpriseDB.com/

  8. Re: EXCEPT TABLE - Case inconsistency for describe \d and \dRp+

    Peter Smith <smithpb2250@gmail.com> — 2026-04-16T23:03:38Z

    On Fri, Apr 17, 2026 at 12:10 AM Álvaro Herrera <alvherre@kurilemu.de> wrote:
>
> On 2026-Apr-10, Peter Smith wrote:
>
> > # -- describe the tables
> > # \d t1
> >                 Table "public.t1"
> > Column | Type   | Collation | Nullable | Default
> > --------+---------+-----------+----------+---------
> > a      | integer |           |          |
> > Except Publications:
> >   "pub1"
>
> I have a hard time understanding what an "except publication" is.  I
> think this would be clearer if the header said "Excluded from publications:"
>

I agree that your suggestion is clearer.

If we make that change, then should the "Publications:" footer also be
modified similarly (to "Included in publications:") so they match?

e.g.

CURRENTLY

test_pub=# \d t1
                 Table "public.t1"
 Column |  Type   | Collation | Nullable | Default
--------+---------+-----------+----------+---------
 a      | integer |           |          |
Publications:
    "pub1"
    "pub2"
Except publications:
    "pub3"

~~~

SUGGESTION

test_pub=# \d t1
                 Table "public.t1"
 Column |  Type   | Collation | Nullable | Default
--------+---------+-----------+----------+---------
 a      | integer |           |          |
Included in publications:
    "pub1"
    "pub2"
Excluded from publications:
    "pub3"

~~~

I will wait for more opinions/consensus before providing a patch.

======
Kind Regards,
Peter Smith.
Fujitsu Australia

  9. Re: EXCEPT TABLE - Case inconsistency for describe \d and \dRp+

    Amit Kapila <amit.kapila16@gmail.com> — 2026-04-17T05:23:48Z

    On Fri, Apr 17, 2026 at 4:34 AM Peter Smith <smithpb2250@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On Fri, Apr 17, 2026 at 12:10 AM Álvaro Herrera <alvherre@kurilemu.de> wrote:
> >
> > On 2026-Apr-10, Peter Smith wrote:
> >
> > > # -- describe the tables
> > > # \d t1
> > >                 Table "public.t1"
> > > Column | Type   | Collation | Nullable | Default
> > > --------+---------+-----------+----------+---------
> > > a      | integer |           |          |
> > > Except Publications:
> > >   "pub1"
> >
> > I have a hard time understanding what an "except publication" is.  I
> > think this would be clearer if the header said "Excluded from publications:"
> >
>
> I agree that your suggestion is clearer.
>
> If we make that change, then should the "Publications:" footer also be
> modified similarly (to "Included in publications:") so they match?
>
> e.g.
>
> CURRENTLY
>
> test_pub=# \d t1
>                  Table "public.t1"
>  Column |  Type   | Collation | Nullable | Default
> --------+---------+-----------+----------+---------
>  a      | integer |           |          |
> Publications:
>     "pub1"
>     "pub2"
> Except publications:
>     "pub3"
>
> ~~~
>
> SUGGESTION
>
> test_pub=# \d t1
>                  Table "public.t1"
>  Column |  Type   | Collation | Nullable | Default
> --------+---------+-----------+----------+---------
>  a      | integer |           |          |
> Included in publications:
>     "pub1"
>     "pub2"
> Excluded from publications:
>     "pub3"
>
> ~~~
>

+1 for the proposal. It makes the description clear.

-- 
With Regards,
Amit Kapila.

  10. Re: EXCEPT TABLE - Case inconsistency for describe \d and \dRp+

    Peter Smith <smithpb2250@gmail.com> — 2026-04-17T08:45:53Z

    On Fri, Apr 17, 2026 at 3:24 PM Amit Kapila <amit.kapila16@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On Fri, Apr 17, 2026 at 4:34 AM Peter Smith <smithpb2250@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > On Fri, Apr 17, 2026 at 12:10 AM Álvaro Herrera <alvherre@kurilemu.de> wrote:
> > >
> > > On 2026-Apr-10, Peter Smith wrote:
> > >
> > > > # -- describe the tables
> > > > # \d t1
> > > >                 Table "public.t1"
> > > > Column | Type   | Collation | Nullable | Default
> > > > --------+---------+-----------+----------+---------
> > > > a      | integer |           |          |
> > > > Except Publications:
> > > >   "pub1"
> > >
> > > I have a hard time understanding what an "except publication" is.  I
> > > think this would be clearer if the header said "Excluded from publications:"
> > >
> >
> > I agree that your suggestion is clearer.
> >
> > If we make that change, then should the "Publications:" footer also be
> > modified similarly (to "Included in publications:") so they match?
> >
> > e.g.
> >
> > CURRENTLY
> >
> > test_pub=# \d t1
> >                  Table "public.t1"
> >  Column |  Type   | Collation | Nullable | Default
> > --------+---------+-----------+----------+---------
> >  a      | integer |           |          |
> > Publications:
> >     "pub1"
> >     "pub2"
> > Except publications:
> >     "pub3"
> >
> > ~~~
> >
> > SUGGESTION
> >
> > test_pub=# \d t1
> >                  Table "public.t1"
> >  Column |  Type   | Collation | Nullable | Default
> > --------+---------+-----------+----------+---------
> >  a      | integer |           |          |
> > Included in publications:
> >     "pub1"
> >     "pub2"
> > Excluded from publications:
> >     "pub3"
> >
> > ~~~
> >
>
> +1 for the proposal. It makes the description clear.
>

OK. Thanks.

Next question: am I only changing this for the table describe (\d)?

I am asking because I noticed the schema describe (\dn) also has a
footer called "Publications:".

----------
test_pub=# CREATE PUBLICATION pub7 FOR TABLES IN SCHEMA my_schema;
CREATE PUBLICATION
test_pub=# \dn+ my_schema
                    List of schemas
   Name    |  Owner   | Access privileges | Description
-----------+----------+-------------------+-------------
 my_schema | postgres |                   |
Publications:
    "pub7"
----------

Would you like this schema footer also changed to say "Included in
publications:"?

======
Kind Regards,
Peter Smith.
Fujitsu Australia

  11. Re: EXCEPT TABLE - Case inconsistency for describe \d and \dRp+

    Peter Smith <smithpb2250@gmail.com> — 2026-04-20T02:56:40Z

    On Fri, Apr 17, 2026 at 3:24 PM Amit Kapila <amit.kapila16@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On Fri, Apr 17, 2026 at 4:34 AM Peter Smith <smithpb2250@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > On Fri, Apr 17, 2026 at 12:10 AM Álvaro Herrera <alvherre@kurilemu.de> wrote:
> > >
> > > On 2026-Apr-10, Peter Smith wrote:
> > >
> > > > # -- describe the tables
> > > > # \d t1
> > > >                 Table "public.t1"
> > > > Column | Type   | Collation | Nullable | Default
> > > > --------+---------+-----------+----------+---------
> > > > a      | integer |           |          |
> > > > Except Publications:
> > > >   "pub1"
> > >
> > > I have a hard time understanding what an "except publication" is.  I
> > > think this would be clearer if the header said "Excluded from publications:"
> > >
> >
> > I agree that your suggestion is clearer.
> >
> > If we make that change, then should the "Publications:" footer also be
> > modified similarly (to "Included in publications:") so they match?
> >
> > e.g.
> >
> > CURRENTLY
> >
> > test_pub=# \d t1
> >                  Table "public.t1"
> >  Column |  Type   | Collation | Nullable | Default
> > --------+---------+-----------+----------+---------
> >  a      | integer |           |          |
> > Publications:
> >     "pub1"
> >     "pub2"
> > Except publications:
> >     "pub3"
> >
> > ~~~
> >
> > SUGGESTION
> >
> > test_pub=# \d t1
> >                  Table "public.t1"
> >  Column |  Type   | Collation | Nullable | Default
> > --------+---------+-----------+----------+---------
> >  a      | integer |           |          |
> > Included in publications:
> >     "pub1"
> >     "pub2"
> > Excluded from publications:
> >     "pub3"
> >
> > ~~~
> >
>
> +1 for the proposal. It makes the description clear.
>

PSA  v3 patches.

v3-0001 - Fixed the TABLE describe footer titles as suggested.
- "Included in publications:"
- "Excluded from publications:"

v3-0002 - Made similar footer title changes for SEQUENCE describe

v3-0003 - Made similar footer title changes for SHCEMA describe. In
passing, I found that this \dn describe output was not even being
tested, so I added the missing regression test.

======
Kind Regards,
Peter Smith.
Fujitsu Australia.

  12. Re: EXCEPT TABLE - Case inconsistency for describe \d and \dRp+

    vignesh C <vignesh21@gmail.com> — 2026-04-20T05:04:47Z

    On Mon, 20 Apr 2026 at 08:27, Peter Smith <smithpb2250@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On Fri, Apr 17, 2026 at 3:24 PM Amit Kapila <amit.kapila16@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > On Fri, Apr 17, 2026 at 4:34 AM Peter Smith <smithpb2250@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > On Fri, Apr 17, 2026 at 12:10 AM Álvaro Herrera <alvherre@kurilemu.de> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > On 2026-Apr-10, Peter Smith wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > # -- describe the tables
> > > > > # \d t1
> > > > >                 Table "public.t1"
> > > > > Column | Type   | Collation | Nullable | Default
> > > > > --------+---------+-----------+----------+---------
> > > > > a      | integer |           |          |
> > > > > Except Publications:
> > > > >   "pub1"
> > > >
> > > > I have a hard time understanding what an "except publication" is.  I
> > > > think this would be clearer if the header said "Excluded from publications:"
> > > >
> > >
> > > I agree that your suggestion is clearer.
> > >
> > > If we make that change, then should the "Publications:" footer also be
> > > modified similarly (to "Included in publications:") so they match?
> > >
> > > e.g.
> > >
> > > CURRENTLY
> > >
> > > test_pub=# \d t1
> > >                  Table "public.t1"
> > >  Column |  Type   | Collation | Nullable | Default
> > > --------+---------+-----------+----------+---------
> > >  a      | integer |           |          |
> > > Publications:
> > >     "pub1"
> > >     "pub2"
> > > Except publications:
> > >     "pub3"
> > >
> > > ~~~
> > >
> > > SUGGESTION
> > >
> > > test_pub=# \d t1
> > >                  Table "public.t1"
> > >  Column |  Type   | Collation | Nullable | Default
> > > --------+---------+-----------+----------+---------
> > >  a      | integer |           |          |
> > > Included in publications:
> > >     "pub1"
> > >     "pub2"
> > > Excluded from publications:
> > >     "pub3"
> > >
> > > ~~~
> > >
> >
> > +1 for the proposal. It makes the description clear.
> >
>
> PSA  v3 patches.
>
> v3-0001 - Fixed the TABLE describe footer titles as suggested.
> - "Included in publications:"
> - "Excluded from publications:"
>
> v3-0002 - Made similar footer title changes for SEQUENCE describe
>
> v3-0003 - Made similar footer title changes for SHCEMA describe. In
> passing, I found that this \dn describe output was not even being
> tested, so I added the missing regression test.

I'm not sure separate patches are necessary for this change; it might
be better to merge them into a single patch. Other than that, the
changes look good.

Regards,
Vignesh

  13. Re: EXCEPT TABLE - Case inconsistency for describe \d and \dRp+

    Peter Smith <smithpb2250@gmail.com> — 2026-04-20T06:46:09Z

    > >
> > PSA  v3 patches.
> >
> > v3-0001 - Fixed the TABLE describe footer titles as suggested.
> > - "Included in publications:"
> > - "Excluded from publications:"
> >
> > v3-0002 - Made similar footer title changes for SEQUENCE describe
> >
> > v3-0003 - Made similar footer title changes for SHCEMA describe. In
> > passing, I found that this \dn describe output was not even being
> > tested, so I added the missing regression test.
>
> I'm not sure separate patches are necessary for this change; it might
> be better to merge them into a single patch. Other than that, the
> changes look good.
>

I separated them because only the changes to TABLE \d had previously
been discussed.

If everyone thinks all changes are good, then I can combine them into one patch.

======
Kind Regards,
Peter Smith.
Fujitsu Australia.

  14. Re: EXCEPT TABLE - Case inconsistency for describe \d and \dRp+

    Yuchen Li <liyuchen_xyz@163.com> — 2026-04-20T08:49:35Z

    On 4/20/2026 2:46 PM, Peter Smith wrote:
>>> PSA  v3 patches.
>>>
>>> v3-0001 - Fixed the TABLE describe footer titles as suggested.
>>> - "Included in publications:"
>>> - "Excluded from publications:"
>>>
>>> v3-0002 - Made similar footer title changes for SEQUENCE describe
>>>
>>> v3-0003 - Made similar footer title changes for SHCEMA describe. In
>>> passing, I found that this \dn describe output was not even being
>>> tested, so I added the missing regression test.
>> I'm not sure separate patches are necessary for this change; it might
>> be better to merge them into a single patch. Other than that, the
>> changes look good.
>>
> I separated them because only the changes to TABLE \d had previously
> been discussed.
>
> If everyone thinks all changes are good, then I can combine them into one patch.
>
> ======
> Kind Regards,
> Peter Smith.
> Fujitsu Australia.
>
While reviewing 0003, I noticed a formatting issue in the following line:

+             * schema mapping count +  1 (for storing NULL).

There is an extra space after "count +".

Regards,
Yuchen Li

  15. Re: EXCEPT TABLE - Case inconsistency for describe \d and \dRp+

    Peter Smith <smithpb2250@gmail.com> — 2026-04-21T06:45:58Z

    On Mon, Apr 20, 2026 at 6:50 PM Yuchen Li <liyuchen_xyz@163.com> wrote:
>
> On 4/20/2026 2:46 PM, Peter Smith wrote:
> >>> PSA  v3 patches.
> >>>
> >>> v3-0001 - Fixed the TABLE describe footer titles as suggested.
> >>> - "Included in publications:"
> >>> - "Excluded from publications:"
> >>>
> >>> v3-0002 - Made similar footer title changes for SEQUENCE describe
> >>>
> >>> v3-0003 - Made similar footer title changes for SHCEMA describe. In
> >>> passing, I found that this \dn describe output was not even being
> >>> tested, so I added the missing regression test.
> >> I'm not sure separate patches are necessary for this change; it might
> >> be better to merge them into a single patch. Other than that, the
> >> changes look good.
> >>
> > I separated them because only the changes to TABLE \d had previously
> > been discussed.
> >
> > If everyone thinks all changes are good, then I can combine them into one patch.
> >
> > ======
> > Kind Regards,
> > Peter Smith.
> > Fujitsu Australia.
> >
> While reviewing 0003, I noticed a formatting issue in the following line:
>
> +             * schema mapping count +  1 (for storing NULL).
>
> There is an extra space after "count +".
>

PSA v4, now combined as Vignesh suggested, and with the extra space also fixed.

======
Kind Regards,
Peter Smith.
Fujitsu Australia.

  16. Re: EXCEPT TABLE - Case inconsistency for describe \d and \dRp+

    Amit Kapila <amit.kapila16@gmail.com> — 2026-04-22T11:27:10Z

    On Tue, Apr 21, 2026 at 12:16 PM Peter Smith <smithpb2250@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> PSA v4, now combined as Vignesh suggested, and with the extra space also fixed.
>

I would like to explicitly mention in the commit message that "Tag for
included publications was a pre-existing behavior but it is better to
change it for making it consistent with excluded publications tag. So,
how about a commit message as follows: "psql: Improve describe footer
titles for publications.

The psql describe (`\d`) footer titles were previously unintuitive
when listing publications that included or excluded specific tables.
Even though the tag for included publications was pre-existing, it is
better to update it to "Included in publications:" to match the
phrasing of the "Excluded from publications:" tag.

Footer titles for sequence and schema descriptions have been updated
similarly to maintain consistency."

-- 
With Regards,
Amit Kapila.

  17. Re: EXCEPT TABLE - Case inconsistency for describe \d and \dRp+

    Peter Smith <smithpb2250@gmail.com> — 2026-04-23T00:34:27Z

    On Wed, Apr 22, 2026 at 9:27 PM Amit Kapila <amit.kapila16@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On Tue, Apr 21, 2026 at 12:16 PM Peter Smith <smithpb2250@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > PSA v4, now combined as Vignesh suggested, and with the extra space also fixed.
> >
>
> I would like to explicitly mention in the commit message that "Tag for
> included publications was a pre-existing behavior but it is better to
> change it for making it consistent with excluded publications tag. So,
> how about a commit message as follows: "psql: Improve describe footer
> titles for publications.
>
> The psql describe (`\d`) footer titles were previously unintuitive
> when listing publications that included or excluded specific tables.
> Even though the tag for included publications was pre-existing, it is
> better to update it to "Included in publications:" to match the
> phrasing of the "Excluded from publications:" tag.
>
> Footer titles for sequence and schema descriptions have been updated
> similarly to maintain consistency."
>
> --

OK, but the order what happened was a bit different.

1/ Firstly, it was only the "Except publications:" footer for \d that
was unintuitive. So that was updated to "Excluded from publications:".
2/ The pre-existing "Publications:" was intuitive as-is, but it was
updated to better match wording of 1.
3/ Then footer titles for sequence/schema were updated same

So maybe reword it slightly something like below:

SUGGESTION

The psql describe (`\d`) footer title was previously unintuitive when listing
publications that excluded specific tables. This has been fixed to say
"Excluded from publications:".

The pre-existing footer title for listing publications that include specific
tables has also been modified to to better match that phrasing. Now it says
"Included in publications:".

Footer titles for sequence and schema descriptions have been updated
similarly to maintain consistency.

======
Kind Regards,
Peter Smith.
Fujitsu Australia

  18. Re: EXCEPT TABLE - Case inconsistency for describe \d and \dRp+

    Amit Kapila <amit.kapila16@gmail.com> — 2026-04-23T09:00:08Z

    On Thu, Apr 23, 2026 at 6:04 AM Peter Smith <smithpb2250@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >
> > I would like to explicitly mention in the commit message that "Tag for
> > included publications was a pre-existing behavior but it is better to
> > change it for making it consistent with excluded publications tag. So,
> > how about a commit message as follows: "psql: Improve describe footer
> > titles for publications.
> >
> > The psql describe (`\d`) footer titles were previously unintuitive
> > when listing publications that included or excluded specific tables.
> > Even though the tag for included publications was pre-existing, it is
> > better to update it to "Included in publications:" to match the
> > phrasing of the "Excluded from publications:" tag.
> >
> > Footer titles for sequence and schema descriptions have been updated
> > similarly to maintain consistency."
> >
> > --
>
> OK, but the order what happened was a bit different.
>

Pushed.

-- 
With Regards,
Amit Kapila.

  19. Re: EXCEPT TABLE - Case inconsistency for describe \d and \dRp+

    Álvaro Herrera <alvherre@kurilemu.de> — 2026-04-23T10:33:53Z

    On 2026-Apr-23, Amit Kapila wrote:

> Pushed.

Thank you!

-- 
Álvaro Herrera               48°01'N 7°57'E  —  https://www.EnterpriseDB.com/
"Fundamental layering violations tend to bite you on tender
parts of your anatomy."                          (Tom Lane)
https://postgr.es/m/2818249.1748706121@sss.pgh.pa.us