Message-ID: <40E8C27E.2050505@telstra.net>
Date: Mon, 05 Jul 2004 12:52:46 +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: Christopher Kings-Lynne <chriskl@familyhealth.com.au>
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>	
	<40E3949F.6020201@telstra.net>
	<40E3BB25.4020804@pse-consulting.de>	
	<k6xn3cph.fsf@bullysports.com>
	<40E4C305.4070309@familyhealth.com.au>	
	<40E4C367.2080303@telstra.net>
	<1088769438.15415.1.camel@fuji.krosing.net>
	<40E5716D.70403@familyhealth.com.au>
In-Reply-To: <40E5716D.70403@familyhealth.com.au>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Christopher Kings-Lynne wrote:
>>> Well, if we add them (and they would be very useful I reckon) should 
>>> we ensure there's an obvious PG naming thing happening?
> 
> Why are they useful???? If you want PG specific stuff then use the PG 
> specific catalogs!!!

My take on this is that it's a LOT easier for people who don't know the 
internals of the PG catalogs to be able to query the information schema, 
as in the information schema things are generally explicitly named.

Much easier for non-experts, which most people don't want to have to 
invest the time in becoming.

Regards and best wishes,

Justin Clift

> Chris