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