Hello if you are thinking about this direction, then store there some demo project.
I am don't think so isolated table has significant price. Regards Pavel 2014-04-23 8:45 GMT+02:00 Craig Ringer <cr...@2ndquadrant.com>: > On 04/23/2014 02:11 PM, Simon Riggs wrote: > > I propose we add a single table called Postgres when we Initdb > > > > CREATE TABLE Postgres (Id Integer, Data Jsonb); > > Without particular comment on the need for the table, I'd be concerned > about calling it "postgres". > > My personal impression from Stack Overflow etc has been that users are > readily confused by the fact that we have: > > - Database engine/system "postgres" > - backend binary "postgres" (they see it in ps) > - unix user "postgres" > - Pg superuser "postgres" > - database "postgres" > > Sure, there's an argument for running with the theme here, but I suspect > using the name "postgres" for a default table will just muddy the waters > a bit more. > > Even "postgres_table" would help. > > It *absolutely must* be lower case, whatever it is, IMO. If you're going > for newest-of-the-newbies, the last thing you want to do is having them > dealing with it being just Postgres in some places, and having to be > "Postgres" in others. > > Personally, don't know if I'm convinced it's overly worth doing - but I > think it's silly to dismiss without actually corralling up some users > who're unfamiliar with Pg and watching them get started. I'd love to see > some properly conducted usability studies of Pg, and something like this > would fit in well. > > -- > Craig Ringer http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/ > PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services > > > -- > Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) > To make changes to your subscription: > http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers >
