| From: | "David G(dot) Johnston" <david(dot)g(dot)johnston(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | "Peter J(dot) Holzer" <hjp-pgsql(at)hjp(dot)at> |
| Cc: | "pgsql-generallists(dot)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-general(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: I do not get the point of the information_schema |
| Date: | 2018-02-13 23:25:58 |
| Message-ID: | CAKFQuwYTQYwrXjR9uYKSOefH13GfVFmq1BwcLmp-1t4SS-MN=Q@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general |
On Tue, Feb 13, 2018 at 4:17 PM, Peter J. Holzer <hjp-pgsql(at)hjp(dot)at> wrote:
>
> It is possible that all the columns that PostgreSQL has are required by
> the standard and that MariaDB is non-conforming by omitting them, but at
> least some of the names look quite PostgreSQL-specific to me. So my
> guess is that the standard only requires the first 4 and the rest are
> RDBMS-specific.
Unless our docs are completely misleading I'd say that PostgreSQL is being
conforming while MariaDB is treating information_schema as their version of
pg_catalog (or at least our system views over top of pg_catalog).
https://www.postgresql.org/docs/10/static/infoschema-tables.html
If 5 and 6 and the last columns were not standard conforming it would seem
pointless to include them since we don't have/implement the features they
cover.
David J.
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2018-02-13 23:46:25 | Re: I do not get the point of the information_schema |
| Previous Message | Peter J. Holzer | 2018-02-13 23:17:31 | Re: I do not get the point of the information_schema |