Re: [HACKERS] Are we losing momentum?

From: Sean Chittenden <sean(at)chittenden(dot)org>
To: Jan Wieck <JanWieck(at)Yahoo(dot)com>, The Hermit Hacker <scrappy(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Cc: Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Curt Sampson <cjs(at)cynic(dot)net>, Brent Verner <brent(at)rcfile(dot)org>, pgsql-patches(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Are we losing momentum?
Date: 2003-08-17 05:48:16
Message-ID: 20030817054815.GA70920@perrin.int.nxad.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-advocacy pgsql-general pgsql-hackers pgsql-patches

> Bruce Momjian wrote:
> >I assume we agreed against adding a MySQL mode --- just verifying.
>
> We agreed that applications that need schema information are much better
> off using the schema views.
>
> Jan

Heh, I don't think there was any agreement on anything in that thread,
everyone had their own view (no pun intended).

> From: The Hermit Hacker <scrappy(at)postgresql(dot)org>
>
> Personally, I think adding the SHOW commands would be a good thing
> ... psql is nice with its \df to get information without having to
> learn all the JOINs required ... having that ability easily from any
> of the interfaces would definitely be a plus ... to me, its not
> about MySQL compatibility, but about a small improvement to ease of
> use :)

Which goes back to the point about there being little agreement on
this patch or its issues. A handful of folks think it's a _user
interface_ issue (read: psql, phppgadmin, pgadminIII, etc) and would
be good for converting MySQL users to PostgreSQL (or simply because
its easy and less obtuse than a \ command), others thought it was a
fugly hack to have a parser in the front end and that it should be
handled on the backend by extending SQL to conform to MySQL's
interface (that some argue is incorrect and would unjustly bloat the
backend) that way all clients have the SHOW syntax (thus averting a
possible FAQ), and others took a more elitist mindset and simply
thought that everyone should just select from the information schemas.

*shrug* I tabled working on the patch until there was some kind of
agreement from someone with commit privs and am waiting to pick up
quashing the remaining parser state bug until after 7.4's out the door
or there's renewed interest from non-users.

-sc

--
Sean Chittenden

In response to

Browse pgsql-advocacy by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message MI SEGURO ESCUDO 2003-08-17 22:39:35 ¡POR SU DERECHO A ELEGIR MEJOR!
Previous Message Bruce Momjian 2003-08-17 03:33:14 Re: [PATCH] Re: [pgsql-advocacy] Why READ ONLY transactions?

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Matthew D. Fuller 2003-08-17 05:48:54 Re: Arrays and "goodness" in RDBMSs (was Re: join of array)
Previous Message Bruce Momjian 2003-08-17 05:36:28 Re: array concat, et al patch (was: [GENERAL] join of array)

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Sean Chittenden 2003-08-17 05:50:40 Re: compile error on cvs tip
Previous Message Stephan Szabo 2003-08-17 05:40:30 Re: Question with hashed IN

Browse pgsql-patches by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Matthew D. Fuller 2003-08-17 05:48:54 Re: Arrays and "goodness" in RDBMSs (was Re: join of array)
Previous Message Bruce Momjian 2003-08-17 05:36:28 Re: array concat, et al patch (was: [GENERAL] join of array)