Josh Berkus <josh@agliodbs.com> writes:
> Yes, I agree with him on that.  However, there's a certain amount of 
> confusion inspired by the organization that: "If you want to look up the 
> table's columns go to information_schmea, if you want the table *size* 
> go to sysviews."  But maybe that's unavoidable.  Or maybe we could link 
> the information_schema views into pg_sysviews?

We could, but I'd argue that this makes sense only if the added
PG-specific stuff looks like a seamless extension of the standard
definitions.  If there are obvious differences in naming style, table
layout, etc, I'd expect such a setup to look more like a hodgepodge
than a good idea.

                        regards, tom lane

---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 1: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate
       subscribe-nomail command to [EMAIL PROTECTED] so that your
       message can get through to the mailing list cleanly

Reply via email to