Hi Kevin, On Sunday 18 July 2010 21:24:25 Kevin Grittner wrote: > Stefan Kaltenbrunner <ste...@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. Such tables sure do not fit queries as in
On Sunday 18 July 2010 20:39:07 Dimitri Fontaine wrote: > SHOW ANY TABLE > GROUP BY tablename > HAVING array_agg(attributes) @> array['date'::regtype, 'time'::regtype]; At least I dont see any way how you could define aggregation or such sensibly here. Thats the part which scares me quite a bit. Andres -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
