On May 11, 2005, at 7:38, Greg Sabino Mullane wrote:
So they are willing to learn the new system views, but not the system
tables? The above seems an argument for I_S, or at least an expanded I_S.
So... the reason we don't want to expand (not alter) I_S is that it is a
"standard" that very few RDBMS actually bother to implement, is already
out of date, and is incomplete? Seems we bend the rules in other ways when
needed (e.g. lowercase relation names), we could certainly add additional
tables and columns here, while maintaining the "standard" set for applications
looking for them.
One of the reasons I've been impressed with PostgreSQL and its developers is that I've seen respect for the SQL specifications *except in cases where it would seriously break backwards compatibility*. In implementing new features, if the SQL spec has something to say about it, it's been my observation that good efforts have been made to comply, though sometimes other syntax or PostgreSQL extensions are made.
This is not to say the SQL spec is perfect. (At heart I lean toward the Date/Darwin relational model, but that's just me :) However, to take something that *is* specified by SQL (and if I understand correctly, was *implemented in PostgreSQL specifically for SQL compliance*, it would be a shame to break that. I think PostgreSQL's spec compliance is a nice bragging point as well -- we do the spec, and more :)
Additional views that depend where possible on the INFORMATION_SCHEMA could actually be a good thing, as the INFORMATION_SCHEMA follows the spec, it'd be less likely to change between versions and make maintenance easier. That said, I haven't looked at the work the new systems views people have done. I recognize their motivation, as the times I've needed to look at the current system tables, it's always been with the docs open right beside me, flipping between pages to see everything I need to join to get the information I want. I for one am happy and grateful that a group of people have taken it upon themselves to provide an easier way to view Postgres system information, and think that the additional views in some form would make a great addition to PostgreSQL.
Michael Glaesemann grzm myrealbox com
---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 6: Have you searched our list archives?
http://archives.postgresql.org
