RE: Re: [INTERFACES] RE: JDBC now needs updates for lar ge objects

From: Magnus Hagander <mha(at)sollentuna(dot)net>
To: "'Tom Lane'" <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Peter Mount <petermount(at)maidstone(dot)gov(dot)uk>
Cc: pgsql-interfaces(at)postgresql(dot)org, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: RE: Re: [INTERFACES] RE: JDBC now needs updates for lar ge objects
Date: 2000-10-25 15:02:17
Message-ID: 215896B6B5E1CF11BC5600805FFEA82103D982D7@sirius.edu.sollentuna.se
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers pgsql-interfaces


> > Idea: As we have this type of query in more than one part
> of the source tree
> > (ie: psql, jdbc, probably odbc), should we have a section in the
> > documentation containing common queries, like: retrieving a
> list of tables,
> > views etc?
>
> That's a good thought. It'd be a useful practice to review such
> standard queries from time to time anyway. For example, now that
> outer joins work, a lot of psql's backslash-command queries could
> be simplified (don't need the UNION ALL WITH SELECT NULL hack).
>
> Anyone have time to work up a list?

Perhaps a good long-term solution for this would be to support
INFORMATION_SCHEMA per SQL92? This requires basic schema support, of course
:-)
That way, it would be possible to use other tools as well, and supporting a
standard is always nice :-) Also, it wouldn't be necessary to update all the
frontends if the system table format changes - just update those views.
Everything may not be supported by INFORMATION_SCHEMA, but it may be a step
in the way...

//Magnus

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tony Simopoulos 2000-10-25 15:15:26 Re: RE: JDBC now needs updates for large objects
Previous Message Philip Warner 2000-10-25 15:01:16 Re: AW: AW: BLERe: AW: AW: relation ### modified while in use

Browse pgsql-interfaces by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tony Simopoulos 2000-10-25 15:15:26 Re: RE: JDBC now needs updates for large objects
Previous Message Thomas Lockhart 2000-10-25 14:43:12 Re: new maintainer for the ODBC driver?