| From: | Andrew - Supernews <andrew+nonews(at)supernews(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Views, views, views! (long) |
| Date: | 2005-05-05 20:15:27 |
| Message-ID: | slrnd7kvmv.2ep3.andrew+nonews@trinity.supernews.net |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 2005-05-05, Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com> wrote:
> This makes sense; I do wish that someone had mentioned it when I originally
> raised the subject of new system views. It would have saved us some work.
I'd have raised it myself if I thought there was any mileage in it. As
you can probably guess, I don't.
information_schema is fine at what it is _intended_ for - as a
standardized way of accessing a standard subset of the available metadata.
In that sense it is still necessary - however it is not sufficient, and
I don't believe that either the raw catalogs nor any reasonable extension
of information_schema actually fills that gap.
--
Andrew, Supernews
http://www.supernews.com - individual and corporate NNTP services
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Josh Berkus | 2005-05-05 20:16:08 | Re: [pgsql-advocacy] Increased company involvement |
| Previous Message | Andrew - Supernews | 2005-05-05 20:08:49 | Re: Views, views, views! (long) |