| From: | Andreas Karlsson <andreas(at)proxel(dot)se> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Poll: are people okay with function/operator table redesign? |
| Date: | 2020-04-16 22:05:33 |
| Message-ID: | 7348d4da-58d9-13a0-626f-758df80e8b76@proxel.se |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 4/14/20 4:52 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> Andreas Karlsson <andreas(at)proxel(dot)se> writes:
>> That said, I agree with that quite many of our tables right now are
>> ugly, but I prefer ugly to hard to read. For me the mix of having every
>> third row split into two fields makes the tables very hard to read. I
>> have a hard time seeing which rows belong to which function.
>
> Did you look at the variants without that discussed downthread?
Yeah, I did some of them are quite readable, for example your latest two
screenshots of table 9.10.
Andreas
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Jehan-Guillaume de Rorthais | 2020-04-16 22:07:39 | Re: [BUG] non archived WAL removed during production crash recovery |
| Previous Message | Mark Dilger | 2020-04-16 21:35:46 | Re: cleaning perl code |