Re: Re: Proposal: Store "timestamptz" of database creation on "pg_database"

* Pavel Stehule (pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com) wrote:
> 2013/1/8 Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>:
> > On 1/5/13 11:04 AM, Stephen Frost wrote:
> > Yeah, actually, the other day I was thinking we should get rid of all
> > the system catalogs and use a big EAV-like schema instead. We're not
> > getting any relational-database value out of the current way, and it's
> > just a lot of duplicate code. If we had a full EAV system, we could
> > even do in-place upgrade.
> >
>
> -1
>
> now we have a thousands tables, I am not sure so EAV can get good performance

To be honest, my first reaction to this was an assumption that it was
pure sarcasm..

Seriously tho, the argument for not putting these things into the
various individual catalogs is that they'd create bloat and these items
don't need to be performant. I would think that the kind of timestamps
that we're talking about fall into the same data category as comments on
tables.

If there isn't a good reason for comments on objects to be off in a
generic "this is for any kind of object" table, then perhaps we should
move them into the appropriate catalog tables?

Thanks,

Stephen