From: | Philip Warner <pjw(at)rhyme(dot)com(dot)au> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Should PG backend know how to represent metadata? |
Date: | 2000-07-17 07:06:45 |
Message-ID: | 3.0.5.32.20000717170645.01fc8b80@mail.rhyme.com.au |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
At 02:43 17/07/00 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
>That is a
>substantial advantage, but you only get it if you make sure the backend
>display capability is defined in a way that lets all these apps use it.
>That might take some careful thought. For example, does the definition
>of a table include associated constraints and indexes?
You need to separate the API from what is displayed (eg. in psql).
Suggestion:
I would envisage the API consisting of a custom dump routine for each
object type. In the case of the table dumper API, it would return a table
definition with no indexes or constraints and a list of related entities
consisting of (object-type, object-oid) pairs suitable for passing back to
the dumper API. psql could display as little or as much as it desired,
pg_dump could ferret the extra items away for later use etc. For those
items that can not be separated out, then they obviously have to go into
the main definition.
>Also, psql's \d command
>doesn't display the schema of a table in the form of a CREATE command
>to recreate it, and I don't think it should.
I agree. \D is not to replace \d or \df etc.
>Certainly you don't want
>to condemn every app that wants to know "what are the columns of this
>table"
This is where we need to decide what the dumper code is for. I don't know
much about the other things you have mentioned, so perhaps you could
expand. But, in my original plan, this suggestion was intended for human
readable dumps from pg_dump and psql. It would be great if it could be made
to work elsewhere.
> to have to include a full SQL parser to make sense of the
>answer. So I think some thought is needed to figure out what a
>general-purpose representation would be like.
And where it would go...
----------------------------------------------------------------
Philip Warner | __---_____
Albatross Consulting Pty. Ltd. |----/ - \
(A.C.N. 008 659 498) | /(@) ______---_
Tel: (+61) 0500 83 82 81 | _________ \
Fax: (+61) 0500 83 82 82 | ___________ |
Http://www.rhyme.com.au | / \|
| --________--
PGP key available upon request, | /
and from pgp5.ai.mit.edu:11371 |/
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Philip Warner | 2000-07-17 07:43:39 | Re: Should PG backend know how to represent metadata? |
Previous Message | Philip Warner | 2000-07-17 06:52:01 | Re: Should PG backend know how to represent metadata? |