Re: Phantom Command ID

On Tue, Sep 26, 2006 at 12:35:54PM +0100, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
> Tom Lane wrote:
> >>We could rename pg_attribute as pg_userattribute, and remove all the
> >>system attributes from that. To stay backwards-compatible, we could have
> >>a pg_attribute view on top of that contained the system attributes as
> >>well.
> >>
> >
> >I don't really think this is necessary. How many client programs have
> >you seen that don't explicitly exclude attnum<0 anyway? The places that
> >will need work are inside the backend, and a view won't help them.
> >
>
> None, there probably isn't any client programs like that. It would be
> nice for programs to be able to discover what system attributes there
> is, though.

+1; we need to have some way for users to find that info out, and I
can't think of a better way than pg_attribute.

If we want to create a set of views that are more human friendly I'm all
for it (it's why we started the newsysviews project afterall), but I
don't know if y'all want to open that can of worms back up.
--
Jim Nasby jim(at)nasby(dot)net
EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com 512.569.9461 (cell)