| 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: | Zeugswetter Andreas SB SD <ZeugswetterA(at)spardat(dot)at>, "Joe Conway (wwc)" <jconway(at)cox(dot)net>, Fernando Nasser <fnasser(at)redhat(dot)com>, Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: RFD: schemas and different kinds of Postgres objects |
| Date: | 2002-01-25 17:04:12 |
| Message-ID: | 26407.1011978252@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:
>> I am starting to see the advantages and like it. I also like the exact
>> name "public" for the public schema.
> I wonder if we should think about a 'group' area so people in a group
> can create things that others in the group can see, but not people
> outside the group.
I see no reason to hard-wire such a concept. Given createable
namespaces, ACLs for namespaces, and a settable namespace search path,
people can set up group namespaces or anything else they want.
The (temp, private, public, system) path is suggested as default because
it's the minimum we need to support both SQL92 and backwards-compatible
behaviors. I don't think we should put in special-purpose features
beyond that, when we can instead offer a general mechanism with which
people can build the special-purpose features they want.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Bruce Momjian | 2002-01-25 17:04:58 | Re: new module contrib/tree for 7.2 ? |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2002-01-25 16:56:40 | Re: PostgreSQL crashes with Qmail-SQL |