From: | "George Pavlov" <gpavlov(at)mynewplace(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | <pgsql-sql(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Cc: | <ken(at)sunward(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: The Information Schema vs the PG Catalog |
Date: | 2005-12-27 17:11:20 |
Message-ID: | CCB89282FCE1024EA3DCE687A96A516403895D2B@ehost010-6.exch010.intermedia.net |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-sql |
I would say that pg_catalog is the more complete one whereas the
information_schema the more generic, standards-conformant place. I would
stick with the information_schema unless that becomes inadequate. A case
in point may be sequences. Apart from
information_schema.columns.column_default I haven't seen them
represented anywhere there (please someone correct me if I am wrong).
You can get more information about sequences from pg_catalog.pg_class
(look for pg_class.relkind='S') and various views that sit on top of
that (e.g. pg_statio_all_sequences).
George
> I'm writing PL/pgSQL routines that generate triggers, functions,
> and rules based on design characteristics of tables, columns, and
> other database objects. These routines need to be able to look up
> the definitions of these objects. I see that there are two places
> available to look up this info: the Information Schema and in the
> PG Catalog.
>
> Which source is preferable? Or if that answer isn't absolute,
> what are the reasons or conditions for preferring one over the
> other?
>
> Also, a specific question: Does the Information Schema offer any
> way to list the sequences that exist and their attributes? I
> can't seem to find any.
>
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | David Garamond | 2005-12-27 17:52:11 | order and order line item |
Previous Message | Terry Lee Tucker | 2005-12-23 19:13:16 | Re: Merry Xmas and a Happy New Year |