Tom,
> Any new schemas introduced by PG itself will be named pg_something.
> This is not open to negotiation --- it's what we've promised to users
> to avoid tromping on their schema namespace.
I can see the sense in that. So, there's four ways I can see to do things:
1) leave the existing views (pg_tables, pg_views, etc.) the way they are
except for adding columns. Create new views based on the naming scheme of
the old.
2) create new views in pg_catalog, using new names. The problem with this is
that the most intuitive names (pg_tables, pg_views) are taken by the old
views and I'm not sure what to name the new ones.
3) create a new schema with the system views in it, called for example
pg_system_views. This seems cluttered to me; a whole new schema just for a
dozen views?
4) ignore backwards compatibility and just re-write the old views. I can
hear the shouting already ...
So, a choice of annoying options. Does anyone else on the channel have
opinions?
--
Josh Berkus
Aglio Database Solutions
San Francisco
