On Sep 26, 2009, at 11:59 AM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
> Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@commandprompt.com> writes:
>> Right, that works. Updated patch attached; should solve the issues
>> raised in the thread. I renamed the catalog pg_db_role_setting as
>> suggested by Tom.
>> ...
>> I have also added a view, whose only purpose is to convert the role
>> and
>> database OIDs into names. It's been named pg_db_role_settings, but
>> if
>> anyone has a better suggestion I'm all ears.
>
> I dislike the idea of having a catalog and a view whose names are the
> same except for a plural. It's confusing as heck, because no one will
> remember which is which.
>
> Since pg_settings is the existing user view, I think
> pg_db_role_settings
> is a reasonable choice for the new view, but then we need a different
> name for the catalog. The only thing that comes to mind right now is
> "pg_db_role_default", but I don't like it much. Anybody have other
> suggestions?
The problem of having both a table and a closely related view is, IME,
one that comes up a lot. I think you just need to pick a convention
and stick with it. Mine is to append "_view" to the table name.
Renaming the underlying table doesn't seem like it helps at all.
...Robert
