if you are thinking about this direction, then store there some demo

I am don't think so isolated table has significant price.



2014-04-23 8:45 GMT+02:00 Craig Ringer <cr...@2ndquadrant.com>:

> On 04/23/2014 02:11 PM, Simon Riggs wrote:
> > I propose we add a single table called Postgres when we Initdb
> >
> >   CREATE TABLE Postgres (Id Integer, Data Jsonb);
> Without particular comment on the need for the table, I'd be concerned
> about calling it "postgres".
> My personal impression from Stack Overflow etc has been that users are
> readily confused by the fact that we have:
> - Database engine/system "postgres"
> - backend binary "postgres" (they see it in ps)
> - unix user "postgres"
> - Pg superuser "postgres"
> - database "postgres"
> Sure, there's an argument for running with the theme here, but I suspect
> using the name "postgres" for a default table will just muddy the waters
> a bit more.
> Even "postgres_table" would help.
> It *absolutely must* be lower case, whatever it is, IMO. If you're going
> for newest-of-the-newbies, the last thing you want to do is having them
> dealing with it being just Postgres in some places, and having to be
> "Postgres" in others.
> Personally, don't know if I'm convinced it's overly worth doing - but I
> think it's silly to dismiss without actually corralling up some users
> who're unfamiliar with Pg and watching them get started. I'd love to see
> some properly conducted usability studies of Pg, and something like this
> would fit in well.
> --
>  Craig Ringer                   http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
>  PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services
> --
> Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
> To make changes to your subscription:
> http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers

Reply via email to