> -----Original Message-----
> From: pgsql-hackers-owner(at)postgresql(dot)org
> [mailto:pgsql-hackers-owner(at)postgresql(dot)org] On Behalf Of Tom Lane
> Sent: 01 July 2004 05:33
> To: Justin Clift
> Cc: PostgreSQL Hackers Mailing List
> Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Adding column comment to
> Justin Clift <jc(at)telstra(dot)net> writes:
> > Not sure how worthwhile others will find this small patch (to CVS
> > HEAD), but we found it useful. It adds the column comments to the
> > information_schema.columns view.
> This question has been touched on before, but I guess it's
> time to face it fair and square: is it reasonable for an SQL
> implementation to add implementation-specific columns to an
> information_schema view? One could certainly argue that the
> entire point of information_schema is to be *standard*, not
> more, not less. OTOH I do not know if adding an extra column
> is likely to break anyone's application. Comments?
If you write code to use it, then by definition you are writing code
that is PostgreSQL specific and therefore not standard. If someone then
writes their code to PostgreSQLs implementation of the
information_schema, wanting reasonably portable code, but not realising
we've extended the standard then they could be in for surprise when they
come to run their code on another platform.
Ugh, just read that back - I need coffee....
I say keep it standard.
pgsql-hackers by date
|Next:||From: Justin Clift||Date: 2004-07-01 10:42:57|
|Subject: Bug with view definitions?|
|Previous:||From: Andreas Pflug||Date: 2004-07-01 07:20:05|
|Subject: Re: Adding column comment to information_schema.columns|