Re: Can we get SQL Server-like cross database queries

From: Laurenz Albe <laurenz(dot)albe(at)cybertec(dot)at>
To: Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)gmail(dot)com>, Ron <ronljohnsonjr(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: "pgsql-generallists(dot)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-general(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Can we get SQL Server-like cross database queries
Date: 2020-06-04 05:56:49
Message-ID: 39ebae9e6498e4fce6e80f94dfc222d7b032ad84.camel@cybertec.at
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general

On Thu, 2020-06-04 at 16:41 +1200, Thomas Munro wrote:
> There's no doubt it's useful, and it's also part of the SQL spec,
> which says you can do catalog.schema.table. I would guess that we
> might get that as a byproduct of any project to make PostgreSQL
> multithreaded. That mountain moving operation will require us to get
> rid of all the global state that currently ties a whole process to one
> session and one database, and replace it with heap objects with names
> like Session and Database that can be passed around between worker
> threads.

I am -1 on cross-database queries.

I think it is a desirable feature to have databases isolated from
each other, so you don't have to worry about a permission you forgot
that allows somebody to access a different database.

I think this is particularly relevant since all databases share the
same users.

I understand that sometimes the opposite would be desirable, but
foreign data wrappers have alleviated that pain.

Yours,
Laurenz Albe

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Sonam Sharma 2020-06-04 07:09:13 Re: Shared memory error
Previous Message Tim Dawborn 2020-06-04 05:46:52 Potential optimisation for the creation of a partial index condition over a newly created nullable, non-default-valued column?