On Wed, Oct 08, 2014 at 12:41:46AM -0300, Fabrízio de Royes Mello wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 8, 2014 at 12:36 AM, Josh Berkus <josh@agliodbs.com> wrote:
> >
> > On 10/07/2014 09:44 AM, Fabrízio de Royes Mello wrote:
> > > We can think in a mechanism to create "properties / options" and assign
> it
> > > to objects (table, index, column, schema, ...) like COMMENT does.
> > >
> > > A quickly thought:
> > >
> > > CREATE OPTION [ IF NOT EXISTS ] name
> > > VALIDATOR valfunction
> > > [ DEFAULT value ];
> > >
> > > ALTER TABLE name
> > > SET OPTION optname { TO | = } { value | 'value' | DEFAULT };
> > >
> > > It's just a simple thought of course. We must think better about the
> syntax
> > > and purposes.
> >
> > If we're going to do this (and it seems like a good idea), we really,
> > really, really need to include some general system views which expose
> > the options in a user-friendly format (like columns, JSON or an array).
> > It's already very hard for users to get information about what
> > reloptions have been set.
> >
>
> Maybe into "information_schema" ??
Not there. The information schema is defined pretty precisely in the
SQL standard and contains only some of this kind of information.
pg_catalog seems like a much more appropriate space for
PostgreSQL-specific settings.
Cheers,
David.
--
David Fetter <david@fetter.org> http://fetter.org/
Phone: +1 415 235 3778 AIM: dfetter666 Yahoo!: dfetter
Skype: davidfetter XMPP: david.fetter@gmail.com
iCal: webcal://www.tripit.com/feed/ical/people/david74/tripit.ics
Remember to vote!
Consider donating to Postgres: http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate
