Re: Request to Remove Unused xmin Column from Function Properties Queries

So it looks like there are at least 2 distinct versions of Postgres-compatible 
Amazon Aurora.

The regular Aurora would have all the regular Postgres features I suppose.

While the one you linked to is a specialized Distributed or DSQL variant and I 
see it is actually missing a huge amount of standard features, including foreign 
keys, sequences, triggers, exclusion constraints, and mixing DDL and DML in a 
common transaction.

Darren Duncan

On 2025-07-29 2:48 a.m., Dave Page wrote:
> On Tue, 29 Jul 2025 at 10:24, Darren Duncan wrote:
> 
>     I had understood that Aurora mainly differed with its lower level internals
>     implementation, but that it should look the same from a user perspective and
>     thus be drop-in compatible with regular Postgres in practice, such that any
>     database schemas or clients that work in regular should work with it unmodified.
> 
>     What are the main differences you see in Aurora that are surfaced to users such
>     that they would have any kinds of impact on pgAdmin compatibility?
> 
> 
> Things related to the underlying storage engine like system columns on tables, 
> for example xmin/xmax/ctid which might be different, but there are also a bunch 
> of unsupported features (https://docs.aws.amazon.com/aurora-dsql/latest/ 
> userguide/working-with-postgresql-compatibility-unsupported-features.html), none of which pgAdmin 
> knows are unsupported or in what way - e.g. are there system catalogues that are 
> missing, will DDL be accepted but do nothing or will it throw errors, will some 
> of the catalogues be missing individual columns that may not be needed because 
> certain features are unsupported? The list is likely longer than that, but you 
> get the gist.
> 
> -- 
> Dave Page
> pgAdmin: https://www.pgadmin.org <https://www.pgadmin.org>
> PostgreSQL: https://www.postgresql.org <https://www.postgresql.org>
> pgEdge: https://www.pgedge.com <https://www.pgedge.com>
>