| From: | Zeugswetter Andreas SB <ZeugswetterA(at)wien(dot)spardat(dot)at> |
|---|---|
| To: | "'Philip Warner'" <pjw(at)rhyme(dot)com(dot)au>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | AW: AW: Unhappy thoughts about pg_dump and objects inhe rited from template1 |
| Date: | 2000-11-09 16:10:02 |
| Message-ID: | 11C1E6749A55D411A9670001FA687963368102@sdexcsrv1.f000.d0188.sd.spardat.at |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
> 3. Schemas are what we call databases. They contain tables, views wtc.
Let us not start this all over again. Our database would correspond to a catalog
if we put schemas below our database hierarchy.
The standard requires, that you see all schemas within one catalog in
one user session. We do not see tables in another database,
thus our database is not equivalent to ANSI schemas.
The standard also requires, that you can qualify a tablename with a schema,
like: "myschema".tabname. This will be the most difficult thing for us.
Andreas
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Zeugswetter Andreas SB | 2000-11-09 16:16:20 | AW: AW: Unhappy thoughts about pg_dump and objects inhe rited from template1 |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2000-11-09 16:04:39 | Re: AW: Unhappy thoughts about pg_dump and objects inherited from template1 |