Re: Views, views, views: Summary of Arguments

From: "Merlin Moncure" <merlin(dot)moncure(at)rcsonline(dot)com>
To: "Tom Lane" <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, "Josh Berkus" <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>, "Thomas F(dot) O'Connell" <tfo(at)sitening(dot)com>
Subject: Re: Views, views, views: Summary of Arguments
Date: 2005-05-12 15:18:14
Message-ID: 6EE64EF3AB31D5448D0007DD34EEB3415C2835@Herge.rcsinc.local
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

> 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.

Argument 2: they can be dropped or modified. A few weeks ago I was
complaining about non-priv users being able to see all my source code in
pg_proc. Problem solved. Now I can totally shut down pgAdmin for a
class of users if I desire (and I do).

Argument 3: backwards compatibility. Do you remember how tablespaces
introduction broke pgAdmin?

Merlin

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Andreas Pflug 2005-05-12 15:28:56 Re: New Contrib Build?
Previous Message Tom Lane 2005-05-12 15:05:58 Re: implementing NOTIFY with message parameter