On Thu, May 05, 2005 at 08:15:27PM -0000, Andrew - Supernews wrote: > On 2005-05-05, Josh Berkus <josh@agliodbs.com> wrote: > > This makes sense; I do wish that someone had mentioned it when I > > originally raised the subject of new system views. It would have > > saved us some work. > > I'd have raised it myself if I thought there was any mileage in it. > As you can probably guess, I don't. > > information_schema is fine at what it is _intended_ for - as a > standardized way of accessing a standard subset of the available > metadata. In that sense it is still necessary - however it is not > sufficient, and I don't believe that either the raw catalogs nor any > reasonable extension of information_schema actually fills that gap.
The information schema has the same problem that every other system built for every database does: it has a minimal set of abstract information, which prevents it, by design, from having application- specific functionality. Kudos to the New System Views people for their hard work thus far :) Cheers, D -- David Fetter [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://fetter.org/ phone: +1 510 893 6100 mobile: +1 415 235 3778 Remember to vote! ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 2: you can get off all lists at once with the unregister command (send "unregister YourEmailAddressHere" to [EMAIL PROTECTED])