You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
Base information_schema.sql_identifier domain on name, not varchar.
The SQL spec says that sql_identifier is a domain over varchar,
but it also says that that domain is supposed to represent the set
of valid identifiers for the implementation, in particular applying
a length limit matching the implementation's identifier length limit.
We were declaring sql_identifier as just "character varying", thus
duplicating what the spec says about base type, but entirely failing
at the rest of it.
Instead, let's declare sql_identifier as a domain over type "name".
(We can drop the COLLATE "C" added by commit 6b0faf7, since that's
now implicit in "name".) With the recent improvements to name's
comparison support, there's not a lot of functional difference between
name and varchar. So although in principle this is a spec deviation,
it's a pretty minor one. And correctly enforcing PG's name length limit
is a good thing; on balance this seems closer to the intent of the spec
than what we had.
But that's all just language-lawyering. The *real* reason to do this is
that it makes sql_identifier columns exposed by information_schema views
be just direct representations of the underlying "name" catalog columns,
eliminating a semantic mismatch that was disastrous for performance of
typical queries on the information_schema. In combination with the
recent change to allow dropping no-op CoerceToDomain nodes, this allows
(for example) queries such as
select ... from information_schema.tables where table_name = 'foo';
to produce an indexscan rather than a seqscan on pg_class.
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/CAFj8pRBUCX4LZ2rA2BbEkdD6NN59mgx+BLo1gO08Wod4RLtcTg@mail.gmail.com
0 commit comments