From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | Rod Taylor <pg(at)rbt(dot)ca> |
Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, Dave Held <dave(dot)held(at)arraysg(dot)com> |
Subject: | Re: Oracle Style packages on postgres |
Date: | 2005-05-11 19:56:27 |
Message-ID: | 16758.1115841387@sss.pgh.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Rod Taylor <pg(at)rbt(dot)ca> writes:
>> There are some nontrivial issues to be thought about here, like under
>> what conditions "CREATE SCHEMA foo" ought to create a top-level schema
>> versus creating a schema under some other schema that we are pretending
>> is the active "catalog". But it seems on first glance like something
>> could be worked out.
> Just go the extra info and call the top level catalogs in the commands
> as well:
Nope, doesn't meet the spec requirements. One thing we can certainly
say is that there would have to be a notion of an "active catalog"
(which could be determined by outside-the-spec means, perhaps a GUC
variable) because "CREATE SCHEMA foo" would have to create foo as a
child of the active catalog.
I'm also fairly unclear on what this implies for search_path searches.
Currently, as soon as you have more than one dotted name, search_path
is ignored ... but should it be used? Maybe "a.b" ought to be sought
as "foo.a.b" for successive values of "foo" from the search path.
regards, tom lane
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Bruce Momjian | 2005-05-11 20:00:37 | Re: Oracle Style packages on postgres |
Previous Message | Rod Taylor | 2005-05-11 19:46:19 | Re: Oracle Style packages on postgres |