From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | Dave Held <dave(dot)held(at)arraysg(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Oracle Style packages on postgres |
Date: | 2005-05-11 04:41:51 |
Message-ID: | 173.1115786511@sss.pgh.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> writes:
> OK, so it seems we need:
> o make private objects accessable only to objects
> in the same schema
> o Allow current_schema.objname to access current
> schema objects
> o session variables
> o nested schemas?
There's been a lot of handwaving about nested schemas in this thread,
but no one has explained how they could actually *work* given the SQL
syntax rules. In general, "a" is a column from the current table
set, "a.b" is a column b in table/alias a from the current query,
"a.b.c" is a column c from table b in schema a, "a.b.c.d" is a column
d from table c in schema b in catalog a, and any more than that is
a syntax error. I do not see how to add nested schemas without creating
unworkable ambiguities, not to say outright violations of the spec.
regards, tom lane
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2005-05-11 04:58:38 | Re: --enable-thread-safety? |
Previous Message | Bruno Wolff III | 2005-05-11 04:39:48 | Re: Can we get patents? |