Re: Do we want SYNONYMS?

On Dec 13, 2010, at 12:03 PM, Jasen Betts wrote:

> On 2010-12-07, Andy Colson <andy(at)squeakycode(dot)net> wrote:
>
>> I think it covers parts. In both you can create an alias to a table,
>> both of which you can fire off insert/update/delete. I assume in PG you
>> could have different permissions for the table and the alias, which I
>> assume you can do in oracle.
>>
>> If we pretend oracle and PG both have the same thing as a schema, and
>> using PG's definition of schema:
>>
>> I assume in oracle you can "create table synonym schemaA.bob for
>> schemaB.tablex"
>>
>> And I assume you could do the same in PG.
>>
>> However beyond that, I dont know what oracle supports that we'd need.
>
> They want synonyms for functions, but as far as I can see the same can be
> achieved with minimal extra work by creating a new LANGUAGE SQL function
> that calls the original.
>
> CREATE FUNCTION newschema.newname( atype ... ) RETURNS rtype
> AS ' select oldschema.oldname ( $1 ... ) ' LANGUAGE SQL;
>
> with apropriare values for the lowercase bits and elipsis.

This could possibly lead to performance issues , and there would be no error
or warning message if you occasionally drop the oldschema.oldname, rendering
the newschema.newname useless.

/A
--
Alexey Klyukin http://www.CommandPrompt.com/
The PostgreSQL Company - Command Prompt, Inc