From: | Robert Treat <xzilla(at)users(dot)sourceforge(dot)net> |
---|---|
To: | Christopher Kings-Lynne <chriskl(at)familyhealth(dot)com(dot)au> |
Cc: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, "Thomas F(dot) O'Connell" <tfo(at)sitening(dot)com>, Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Views, views, views: Summary of Arguments |
Date: | 2005-05-12 21:52:43 |
Message-ID: | 200505121752.43484.xzilla@users.sourceforge.net |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Thursday 12 May 2005 01:32, Christopher Kings-Lynne wrote:
> > FWIW, I don't see the issue as "internal vs external" at all. What's
> > bothering me is whether these views can be considered sufficiently
> > more stable and better designed than the physical system catalogs
> > to justify recommending that application designers should rely on
> > the views instead of the catalogs. That point doesn't seem to me
> > to have been proven. The recent arguments in favor seem to boil down to
> > "novices will find these easier to use", which is very possibly true,
> > but novices don't have the same needs as programs.
>
> As lead phpPgAdmin developer, I'm officially in favour of them. The
> main reason being all the extra fruit they have that shows database
> size, etc.
>
As non-lead phpPgAdmin developer, I'd be against using them in phppgadmin.
(note this doesnt mean I am against them in pgsql itself)
> That means we can display this meta information in phpPgAdmin and not
> worry about having to re-implement it all.
>
You have to query something... doesn't bother me to go to the source.
--
Robert Treat
Build A Brighter Lamp :: Linux Apache {middleware} PostgreSQL
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Josh Berkus | 2005-05-12 22:53:57 | Re: Views, views, views: Summary of Arguments |
Previous Message | Oliver Jowett | 2005-05-12 21:43:55 | Re: SQL_ASCII vs. 7-bit ASCII encodings |