On Sun, Jan 23, 2005 at 02:53:11PM -0800, Josh Berkus wrote:
> Jim,
>
> > Perhaps a good way to accomplish both goals is to have the set of
> > human-readable views, and to add columns to the system tables/views that
> > conform with the new, more logical naming convention. This way people
> > accessing system information programmatically can use pg_catalog (and
> > migrate to the new naming convention), while people who are doing ad-hoc
> > queries can just hit the human-readable stuff.
>
> If you think that anyone on this list is going to let us re-name columns in
> the system *tables*, you're on more pain meds than I realized ...
What I figured.
> And in what way is using fully qualified names programmatically a problem?
It's not a problem; my only complaint is that the field names are
awkward as hell, which is why I suggested a new naming convention. If
it comes down to it, I'll settle for better names in the human readable
stuff and hope it eventually can be migrated to pg_catalog stuff. I just
figured changing both at the same time might make more sense.
--
Jim C. Nasby, Database Consultant decibel@decibel.org
Give your computer some brain candy! www.distributed.net Team #1828
Windows: "Where do you want to go today?"
Linux: "Where do you want to go tomorrow?"
FreeBSD: "Are you guys coming, or what?"