Message-ID: <40E3949F.6020201@telstra.net>
Date: Thu, 01 Jul 2004 14:35:43 +1000
From: Justin Clift <jc@telstra.net>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.4.1) Gecko/20040406
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Cc: PostgreSQL Hackers Mailing List <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Subject: Re: Adding column comment to information_schema.columns
References: <40E37E3F.2050400@telstra.net> <22066.1088656403@sss.pgh.pa.us>
In-Reply-To: <22066.1088656403@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Tom Lane wrote:
> Justin Clift <jc@telstra.net> writes:
> 
>>Not sure how worthwhile others will find this small patch (to CVS HEAD), 
>>but we found it useful.  It adds the column comments to the 
>>information_schema.columns view.
> 
> 
> This question has been touched on before, but I guess it's time to face
> it fair and square: is it reasonable for an SQL implementation to add
> implementation-specific columns to an information_schema view?  One
> could certainly argue that the entire point of information_schema is
> to be *standard*, not more, not less.  OTOH I do not know if adding
> an extra column is likely to break anyone's application.  Comments?

Well, I suppose it reduces application portability if anyone starts 
relying on it.

?

Regards and best wishes,

Justin Clift


> 			regards, tom lane
> 
>