X-Original-To: pgsql-hackers-postgresql.org@localhost.postgresql.org
Received: from localhost (unknown [200.46.204.144])
	by svr1.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BE13AD1B42F
	for <pgsql-hackers-postgresql.org@localhost.postgresql.org>;
	Thu,  1 Jul 2004 23:08:49 -0300 (ADT)
Received: from svr1.postgresql.org ([200.46.204.71])
	by localhost (av.hub.org [200.46.204.144]) (amavisd-new, port 10024)
	with ESMTP id 23634-10
	for <pgsql-hackers-postgresql.org@localhost.postgresql.org>;
	Fri,  2 Jul 2004 02:08:50 +0000 (GMT)
Received: from mako1.telstra.net (mako1.telstra.net [203.50.0.28])
	by svr1.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 302D8D1B3CE
	for <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>;
	Thu,  1 Jul 2004 23:08:44 -0300 (ADT)
Received: from telstra.net (xena.telstra.net [203.50.0.233])
	by mako1.telstra.net (8.12.9/8.11.1) with ESMTP id i6228nB4069536
	for <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>; Fri, 2 Jul 2004 12:08:49 +1000 (EST)
	(envelope-from jc@telstra.net)
Message-ID: <40E4C367.2080303@telstra.net>
Date: Fri, 02 Jul 2004 12:07:35 +1000
From: Justin Clift <jc@telstra.net>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.4.1) Gecko/20040406
X-Accept-Language: en-us, en
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: 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>	<40E3949F.6020201@telstra.net>
	<40E3BB25.4020804@pse-consulting.de> <k6xn3cph.fsf@bullysports.com>
	<40E4C305.4070309@familyhealth.com.au>
In-Reply-To: <40E4C305.4070309@familyhealth.com.au>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at hub.org
X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 tagged_above=0.0 required=5.0 tests=
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Archive-Number: 200407/75
X-Sequence-Number: 55636

Christopher Kings-Lynne wrote:
>> There is a huge difference between adhering to a standard and limiting
>> yourself to a standard.  The real question is whether PostgreSQL's
>> goal is to support SQL standards, or whether PostgreSQL's goal is to
>> give PostgreSQL users a useful set of tools.
> 
> 
> There are literally _hundreds_ of fields we could add to the 
> information_schema.  Either we add them all or we add none of them.

Well, if we add them (and they would be very useful I reckon) should we 
ensure there's an obvious PG naming thing happening?

i.e.  pg_column_comment

or similar?  Maybe not "pg_" but you know what I mean.

:-)

Regards and best wishes,

Justin Clift


> Chris
> 
> 
>