On 17 December 2013 18:32, Stephen Frost <sfrost@snowman.net> wrote:
> * Simon Riggs (simon@2ndQuadrant.com) wrote:
>> I keep seeing people repeat "I don't like blobs" as if that were an
>> objection. There is no danger or damage from doing this. I can't see
>> any higher beauty that we're striving for by holding out. Why not
>> allow the user to choose XML, JSON, YAML, or whatever they choose.
>
> I have no idea where you're going with this, but I *do* object to
> sticking an SQL script which defines a bunch of objects into a catalog
> table *right next to where they are properly defined*. There's just no
> sense in it that I can see, except that it happens to mimic what we do
> today- to no particular purpose.
The purpose is clear: so it is part of the database backup. It's a
fairly boring purpose, not fancy at all. But it is a purpose, indeed
*the* purpose.
I don't see any technical objection here.
We aim to have the simplest implementation that meets the stated need
and reasonable extrapolations of that. Text in a catalog table is the
simplest implementation. That is not a reason to reject it, especially
when we aren't suggesting a viable alternative.
I have zero attachment to this design, my interest is in the feature.
How do we achieve the feature if not this way?
-- Simon Riggs http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services