> How fine-grained do we want to get on namespaces? I'd be slightly more
> inclined to have pg_info or maybe pg_utils as a place to stash not only
> extra system views but other utility stuff that we want to ship but is
> essentially droppable.
AFAIK, none of the contributors to newsysviews has any attachment to any
particular name. I'd personally prefer to go with your suggestion of a
more generic schema name.
In response to
pgsql-hackers by date
|Next:||From: Martijn van Oosterhout||Date: 2006-02-27 19:27:44|
|Subject: Re: pg_config, pg_service.conf, postgresql.conf ....|
|Previous:||From: Andrew Dunstan||Date: 2006-02-27 19:20:55|
|Subject: Re: constraints and sql92 information_schema compliance|