Re: Views, views, views: Summary of Arguments

From: "Joshua D(dot) Drake" <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com>
To: Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Views, views, views: Summary of Arguments
Date: 2005-05-10 17:30:07
Message-ID: 4280EF9F.9080402@commandprompt.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

>
> ... thus, as I see it, the *primary* question is in fact argument (2). That
> is, is information_schema sufficient, and if not, can it be extended without
> breaking SQL standards? Argument (1) did not seem to have a lot of evidence
> on the "con" side, and the strongest argument against (3) is that we should
> use information_schema.

(2) The information_schema is good but not sufficient. It either needs
more info as suggested by this thread or we need an extended version for
Pg specifically.

(1) I can't see anyone in their right mind on the user space / support
of users side arguing against the need for more information about
PostgreSQL and the way it interacts.

(3) If we can use the information_schema let's do so. However it should
not be a stopping block.

Sincerely,

Joshua D. Drake
Command Prompt. Inc.

--
Your PostgreSQL solutions company - Command Prompt, Inc. 1.800.492.2240
PostgreSQL Replication, Consulting, Custom Programming, 24x7 support
Managed Services, Shared and Dedication Hosting
Co-Authors: plPHP, plPerlNG - http://www.commandprompt.com/

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Jim C. Nasby 2005-05-10 17:36:39 Re: Views, views, views! (long)
Previous Message Josh Berkus 2005-05-10 17:21:06 Re: Views, views, views: Summary of Arguments