On Mon, Jul 5, 2010 at 2:08 PM, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > Alvaro Herrera <alvhe...@alvh.no-ip.org> writes: >> Is there a reason we don't have t_self as one of the system columns that >> you can examine from SQL? I'd propose its addition otherwise. > > pg_attribute bloat? I'm a bit hesitant to add a row per table for > something we've gotten along without for so long, especially something > with as bizarre a definition as "t_self" has got. > > At one time I was hoping to get rid of explicit entries in pg_attribute > for system columns, which would negate this concern. I think we're > stuck with them now, though, because of per-column permissions.
Because someone might want to grant per-column permissions on those columns? That seems like an awfully thin reason to keep all that bloat around. I bet the number of people who have granted per-column permissions on, say, cmax can be counted on one hand - possibly with five fingers left over. -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise Postgres Company -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
