Robert Haas <robertmh...@gmail.com> writes:
> On Mon, Jun 6, 2011 at 1:03 PM, Alvaro Herrera
> <alvhe...@commandprompt.com> wrote:
>> Hmm, if we're going to have pg_comments as a syntactic sugar kind of
>> thing, it should output things in format immediately useful to the user,
>> i.e. relation/column/etc names and not OIDs. The OIDs would force you
>> to do lots of joins just to make it readable.
> Well, that's basically what this is doing. See the objname/objtype
> columns. It's intended that the output of this view should match the
> format that COMMENT takes as input. But propagating the OIDs through
> is sensible as well, because sometimes people may want to do other
> joins, filtering, etc.
Is it also propagating the catalog OID through? Because joining on OID
alone is not to be trusted.
I tend to agree with Alvaro's viewpoint here: anybody who wants to deal
directly in OIDs is better off joining directly to pg_description, and
not going through the rather large overhead that this view is going to
impose. So we should just make this a purely user-friendly view and be
done with it, not try to create an amalgam that serves neither purpose
well.
regards, tom lane
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
