On Dec 11, 2010, at 3:48 PM, Simon Slavin wrote: > Section 21 of the (SQL92) standard.
Yes, the notorious information schema: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Information_schema > It's absolutely horrible. Des goûts et des couleurs on ne discute point. > Let's try to avoid that if we can. Well, it has the merit of existing and being in use across various databases... so the cost/benefit of designing a slightly better, but different, information schema seem not worthwhile the trouble. In the same way as one could question some of the design choices of SQL itself, one is usually better off sticking to SQL nonetheless. Ditto for that information schema. No point in re-inventing a slightly squared wheel. > Fortunately SQLite has no user model, > so most of it would be > pointless anyway. Not sure what specifically you are referring to, but if it's the concept of schemata, then main, temp and attached databases fit nicely with the notion of schema. _______________________________________________ sqlite-users mailing list sqlite-users@sqlite.org http://sqlite.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sqlite-users
