On Sat, Jul 16, 2022 at 10:53:17AM +0200, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> Now that I see the result, I don't think this is really the right
> improvement yet.
>
> The new System Views chapter lists views that are effectively quasi-system
> catalogs, such as pg_shadow or pg_replication_origin_status -- the fact that
> these are views and not tables is secondary. On the other hand, it lists
> views that are more on the level of information schema views, that is, they
> are explicitly user-facing wrappers around information available elsewhere,
> such as pg_sequences, pg_views.
>
> I think most of them are in the second category. So having this chapter in
> the "Internals" part seems wrong. But then moving it, say, closer to where
> the information schema is documented wouldn't be right either, unless we
> move the views in the first category elsewhere.
>
> Also, consider that we document the pg_stats_ views in yet another place,
> and it's not really clear why something like pg_replication_slots, which
> might often be used together with stats views, is documented so far away
> from them.
>
> Maybe this whole notion that "system views" is one thing is not suitable.
Are you thinking we should just call the chapter "System Catalogs and
Views" and just place them alphabetically in a single chapter?
--
Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> https://momjian.us
EDB https://enterprisedb.com
Indecision is a decision. Inaction is an action. Mark Batterson