| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Andrew Rawnsley <ronz(at)ravensfield(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Dennis Gearon <gearond(at)fireserve(dot)net>, pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: tablespaces and schemas |
| Date: | 2004-06-10 05:41:02 |
| Message-ID: | 20192.1086846062@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general |
Andrew Rawnsley <ronz(at)ravensfield(dot)com> writes:
> Schemas are users in Oracle, but the net effect to the SQL author is
> the same. 'SELECT * FROM SERVICES.USERS' is the same, just that
> 'SERVICES' is a user in oracle (although referred to as a schema, and
> you have to do a 'CREATE SCHEMA AUTHORIZATION blablabla' to get
> anything to work.
Oracle is actually SQL-spec-compliant in this regard (or possibly I
should say the spec is Oracle-compliant, seeing that they probably
dictated these semantics...) The SQL spec is carefully written
so that an implementation that enforces one-to-one matching of
schemas and users is spec-compliant.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2004-06-10 05:51:43 | Re: Postgresql vs. aggregates |
| Previous Message | Shanmugasundaram Doraisamy | 2004-06-10 03:39:37 | Trouble with locking tables - reg. |