On Wednesday September 8 2004 1:50, Ed L. wrote:
> I see that a newly created database in 8.0.0beta2 now has tables
> sql_sizing, sql_sizing_profiles, sql_packages, sql_features,
> sql_implementation_info, and sql_languages as part of the information
> schema.
>
> Given these are system tables, why are these tables not prefixed with
> 'pg_', as in 'pg_sql_sizing', etc?
For years we have long used the fact that pgsql system tables are prefixed
with 'pg_' in various DBA utilities (e.g., dampen noise when querying
pg_tables/pg_class), and more recently to auto-initialize replication for
user tables only. Changing that convention breaks our stuff. I realize
this information schema horse left the barn a year ago, I'm only now seeing
it as we skipped 7.4 altogether. Just curious if there is good reason for
the change in convention, so as to ease my pain.
Ed