Re: Views, views, views! (long)
От | Josh Berkus |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Views, views, views! (long) |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 200505042201.47978.josh@agliodbs.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Views, views, views! (long) (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>) |
Ответы |
Re: Views, views, views! (long)
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Tom, > To put it more bluntly: exactly what are you accomplishing here that > isn't already accomplished, in a *truly* standard fashion, by the > INFORMATION_SCHEMA? Why do we need yet another nonstandard view on > the underlying reality? To quote myself: Q: Why not just use information_schema? A: Because the columns and layout of information_schema is strictly defined by the SQL standard. This prevents it from covering all PostgreSQL objects, or from covering the existing objects adequately to replicate a CREATE statement. As examples, there is no "types" table in information_schema, and the "constraints" table assumes that constraint names are universally unique instead of table-unique as they are in PG. -- Josh Berkus Aglio Database Solutions San Francisco
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: