Martha Stewart called it a Good Thing when pgadmin@pse-consulting.de (Andreas Pflug) wrote:
> Magnus Hagander wrote:
>>> I dislike the name pg_system because it implies that that DB is
>>> somehow special from the point of view of the system ... which is
>>> exactly what it would *not* be.
>> That I can certainly agree with.
>
> I suggested the name to indicate that it's a db used by system
> tools. So from a normal db user's point of view, it says "don't fool
> with this db, you might break some tools you're using.
I would tend to agree with the reasons not to use a "pg_" prefix...
Perhaps something like "sys_" or "def_" (short for "system" or
"default") would be better.
It strikes me as a useful thing to make sure the name contains the
word "share" or "shared" somewhere, as that would give even the most
hapless user that accesses it some suggestion that this database is
"shared", and hence should be treated with some care and with some
attempt to try to "play well" with others. Alternatively, the word
"commons", of the "Tragedy of the Commons", might fit.
Thus, "sys_shared", "def_share", "user_commons" are all sorts of names
that suggest that this is some sort of default/shared area.
--
output = ("cbbrowne" "@" "gmail.com")
http://linuxdatabases.info/info/wp.html
"People who don't use computers are more sociable, reasonable, and ...
less twisted" -- Arthur Norman
