On Apr 11, 2009, at 6:10 PM, lists@xxxxxxxxx wrote:
What do you mean when you say the "catalogs...are database- specific" ? If I'm understanding what you're saying, my whole point is that I don't want to be tied to a database to do any kind of querying about the PG engine itself. Does that make sense?
Look at it from the other side; You have a DBMS and you want to store information about what databases and which users are available, who can and can't connect, etc. It makes sense to store that in a database, right?
To request that information you need to connect to the database server. Considering that information is stored in a database, having to specify that database to connect to makes sense. Whether that's a named database (with a documented fixed name of course, in this case 'template1' or 'postgres') or an anonymous database doesn't make much difference. You'll still have to specify several other connection parameters (host & port at least), so why not also a valid user (quite desirable from a security point of view) and a database name?
It may not make as much sense from a user point of view, but it makes a lot of sense from a database point of view.
Alban Hertroys -- If you can't see the forest for the trees, cut the trees and you'll see there is no forest. !DSPAM:737,49e1ca98129741055947028! -- Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-general
