Kevin Grittner wrote:
> Stefan Kaltenbrunner <stefan@kaltenbrunner.cc> wrote:
> > On 07/18/2010 08:58 PM, Andres Freund wrote:
>
> >> I am quite a bit surprised about all this discussion. I have a
> >> very hard time we will find anything people agree about and can
> >> remember well enough to be usefull for both manual and automatic
> >> processing.
> >>
> >> I agree that the internal pg_* tables are not exactly easy to
> >> query. And that the information_schema. ones arent complete
> >> enough and have enough concept mismatch to be confusing. But why
> >> all this?
> >
> > exactly my thoughts - but as I said earlier maybe this is actually
> > an opportunity to look at newsysviews again?
>
> I can't picture anything which could be done with views which would
> allow me to issue one statement and see everything of interest about
> a table (etc.). You know: tablespace, owner, permissions, columns,
> primary key, foreign keys, check constraints, exclusion constraints,
> ancestor tables, child tables, and whatever interesting features I
> missed or we later add. Other products allow that to be generated
> server-side, so that it is available to any and all clients. I
> think we should join the crowd in this respect.
Consider if the server-side description comes to the client unformatted,
then that format is going to changes as Postgres adds features, and that
might really make the output useless except for raw display purposes.
-- Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> http://momjian.us EnterpriseDB
http://enterprisedb.com
+ It's impossible for everything to be true. +
