Re: Views, views, views! (long) - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Peter Eisentraut
Subject Re: Views, views, views! (long)
Date
Msg-id 200505052058.02804.peter_e@gmx.net
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Views, views, views! (long)  (Josh Berkus <josh@agliodbs.com>)
Responses Re: Views, views, views! (long)
Re: Views, views, views! (long)
List pgsql-hackers
Josh Berkus wrote:
> Either the information schema adheres to 
> the spec, or it only covers 25% of PostgreSQL objects.   There isn't
> a 3rd alternative.  I'm fine with merging this with the
> information_schema (some of these views are derived from the same
> code) but it's either/or.

I can think of a couple of ways offhand about how the information schema 
could be extended without breaking the SQL standard.  You could just 
add columns where needed.  Or you could add tables that are joined to 
the standard tables and contain the extra information.  Or you could 
create a "information_schema_2" that contains a copy of the original 
information schema with the extra information added somewhere, so users 
can easily switch back and forth.

If you look closer, there isn't really all that much that cannot be 
gotten from the information schema.  Figuring out exactly what that is 
might be instructive before deciding how to go forward.

-- 
Peter Eisentraut
http://developer.postgresql.org/~petere/


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: "Marc G. Fournier"
Date:
Subject: Re: [pgsql-advocacy] Increased company involvement
Next
From: Alvaro Herrera
Date:
Subject: Re: [pgsql-advocacy] Increased company involvement