2013/1/8 Peter Eisentraut <pete...@gmx.net>: > On 1/5/13 11:04 AM, Stephen Frost wrote: >> Creating a separate catalog (or two) every time we want to track XYZ for >> all objects is rather overkill... Thinking about this a bit more, and >> noting that pg_description/shdescription more-or-less already exist as a >> framework for tracking 'something' for 'all catalog entries'- why don't >> we just add these columns to those tables..? This would also address >> Peter's concern about making sure we do this 'wholesale' and in one >> release rather than spread across multiple releases- just make sure it >> covers the same set of things which 'comment' does. > > Yeah, actually, the other day I was thinking we should get rid of all > the system catalogs and use a big EAV-like schema instead. We're not > getting any relational-database value out of the current way, and it's > just a lot of duplicate code. If we had a full EAV system, we could > even do in-place upgrade. >
-1 now we have a thousands tables, I am not sure so EAV can get good performance Pavel > Obviously, this isn't going to happen any time soon or ever, but I think > I agree with your concern above as a partial step. > > > > -- > Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) > To make changes to your subscription: > http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers