Re: constraints and sql92 information_schema compliance - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Tom Lane
Subject Re: constraints and sql92 information_schema compliance
Date
Msg-id 19862.1140976633@sss.pgh.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: constraints and sql92 information_schema compliance  (Josh Berkus <josh@agliodbs.com>)
Responses Re: constraints and sql92 information_schema compliance
List pgsql-hackers
Josh Berkus <josh@agliodbs.com> writes:
> 2) Modify the newsysviews to be extensions of the information_schema views:
>     e.g. information_schema.tables would have the SQL03 information, and
>     information_schema.tables_pg would have pg-specific stuff like table size 
> and last analyzed date. 

No way.  The entire point of information_schema is that it is standard;
adding non-spec things to it renders it no better than direct access
to the PG catalogs.

This thread is fairly interesting since we appear to be watching the SQL
committee allowing a brain-dead choice in the initial information_schema
design to force a non-backwards-compatible dumbing-down of the main spec.
Which they would surely never have done if it weren't for their self-
imposed rules about never changing information_schema (rules that they
appear to follow only erratically anyway ;-))

I'm disinclined to risk being put in a similar bind ... so even if
we were at liberty to put PG-specific stuff into information_schema,
I wouldn't do it.
        regards, tom lane


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: "Luke Lonergan"
Date:
Subject: Re: TOAST compression
Next
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: Pl/Python -- current maintainer?