Re: constraints and sql92 information_schema compliance
От | Tom Lane |
---|---|
Тема | Re: constraints and sql92 information_schema compliance |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 19862.1140976633@sss.pgh.pa.us обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: constraints and sql92 information_schema compliance (Josh Berkus <josh@agliodbs.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: constraints and sql92 information_schema compliance
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Josh Berkus <josh@agliodbs.com> writes: > 2) Modify the newsysviews to be extensions of the information_schema views: > e.g. information_schema.tables would have the SQL03 information, and > information_schema.tables_pg would have pg-specific stuff like table size > and last analyzed date. No way. The entire point of information_schema is that it is standard; adding non-spec things to it renders it no better than direct access to the PG catalogs. This thread is fairly interesting since we appear to be watching the SQL committee allowing a brain-dead choice in the initial information_schema design to force a non-backwards-compatible dumbing-down of the main spec. Which they would surely never have done if it weren't for their self- imposed rules about never changing information_schema (rules that they appear to follow only erratically anyway ;-)) I'm disinclined to risk being put in a similar bind ... so even if we were at liberty to put PG-specific stuff into information_schema, I wouldn't do it. regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: