On Nov 17, 2011, at 22:17, Bill Thoen <bthoen@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > I need to assemble a complete data dictionary for project documentation and other purposes and I was wondering about the pros and cons of using the pg_catalog metadata. But I hesitate to poke around in here because I don't know why it's kept so out of sight and not much documented. But it seems like an ideal source of information to tap with a program to generate accurate, current reports of what's in the database. > > Is this a bad idea (everything I'm thinking of doing would be read only except for the description fields) but I'd just like to make sure that there's not some innocent looking table in there that acts as a doomsday device if you so much as read its first record, etc. I'm just not sure why this isn't more widely used or talked about. > > Regards, > > Bill Thoen > GISnet > http://gisnet.com > 303-786-9961 > -- > Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx) > To make changes to your subscription: > http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-general information_schema is the more standardized point of entry into the database meta-data, catalog is generally intended for internals use and thus has a less stable API contract. That said, you are reinventing the wheel if you are looking for a straight dump of the current reality. Various third-party tools already do this. I've used, but am not affiliated with, PostgreSQL Maestro. Also, pgAdmin, I think, provides access to this information as well (as does psql via it's various commands). You should never directly update the catalog but instead use the appropriate SQL command. For descriptions you need to use "COMMENT ON". Reading it should never cause a problem. David J. -- Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-general
