| From: | David Hartwig <daveh(at)insightdist(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | "Thomas G(dot) Lockhart" <lockhart(at)alumni(dot)caltech(dot)edu> |
| Cc: | Jan Wieck <jwieck(at)debis(dot)com>, Bruce Momjian <maillist(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: [HACKERS] Rules for 6.4 finished |
| Date: | 1998-08-26 15:12:25 |
| Message-ID: | 35E425D9.A1262CDF@insightdist.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
This is true. It would be cleaner, though, if we could check for an
attribute in pg_class. I do not recall one for that purpose.
Thomas G. Lockhart wrote:
> > I'm running into some naming problems while doing so. Having
> > pg_table, pg_view etc. as views lets a users assume pg_index
> > would be one too where to get some information. But pg_index
> > already exists.
> >
> > Should I name all of them pgv_... ?
> >
> > Other databases have many views starting with DBA or SYS on
> > the other hand. For now I'll start naming them pgv_..., we
> > could rename them before applying the patch.
>
> I recall that there are some places in the code (maybe only in the
> client-side drivers?) which check explicitly for a "pg_%" pattern to
> decide if a table or resource is a system table.
>
> How about "pg_index_v", for example?
>
> - Tom
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Keith Parks | 1998-08-26 15:43:33 | Re: [HACKERS] Rules for 6.4 finished |
| Previous Message | Magnus Hagander | 1998-08-26 14:40:15 | getopts include? |