| From: | Jaime Casanova <jaime(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: A good illustraton of why we need user-friendly system views |
| Date: | 2012-06-23 05:00:37 |
| Message-ID: | CAJKUy5hJ=e8_=CKT9aduKt7VcUjXgd_qOigd25PHKbj9KRGHjA@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Fri, Jun 22, 2012 at 9:05 PM, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 22, 2012 at 9:30 PM, Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com> wrote:
>> http://pgolub.wordpress.com/2012/06/22/backward-compatibility-never-heard-of-it
>>
>> If we had stable system views for all database objects (stable as in we
>> just append to them), then refactoring our system tables wouldn't break
>> things for our users. Just sayin'.
>
> This has been discussed before, and I'm still not buying it. I mean,
> suppose you wrote code that depended on anything stated in a
> constraint always being true. Then we added deferrable constraints.
> Oops. But would you rather NOT have that feature? Appending columns
> doesn't help in that case.
>
also the incompatibility in the case of tablespaces was a "good" one...
i saw cases where the link was manually moved to another place... and
don't ask, don't know why they do this...
so something reading the spclocation would have been misleading
--
Jaime Casanova www.2ndQuadrant.com
Professional PostgreSQL: Soporte 24x7 y capacitación
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | D'Arcy Cain | 2012-06-23 06:28:03 | Re: COMMUTATOR doesn't seem to work |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2012-06-23 04:17:11 | Re: COMMUTATOR doesn't seem to work |