Christopher Kings-Lynne <chriskl(at)familyhealth(dot)com(dot)au> writes:
>> Do you get where I'm coming from with this?
> Yes, but I disagree.
Same here. The portable information already is in information_schema,
and I don't really see that it's better to find unportable information
in information_schema views than in other catalogs. By the time you
are interested in looking at unportable information, you are already
pretty seriously invested in Postgres...
regards, tom lane