From: | Fernando Nasser <fnasser(at)redhat(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | lockhart(at)fourpalms(dot)org |
Cc: | Gavin Sherry <swm(at)linuxworld(dot)com(dot)au>, Kaare Rasmussen <kar(at)kakidata(dot)dk>, pgsql-patches(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: [HACKERS] Updated TODO item |
Date: | 2002-02-25 01:11:43 |
Message-ID: | 3C798F4F.58F15C90@redhat.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers pgsql-patches |
Thomas Lockhart wrote:
>
> > > > * Make it easier to create a database owned by someone who can't createdb,
> > > > perhaps CREATE DATABASE dbname WITH USER = "user"
> > > CREATE DATABASE dbname WITH OWNER = "user"
> > A much better idea. There is no conflict in using OWNER here.
>
> Does this have the multiple "WITH xxx" clauses which were discussed
> earlier? That is a nonstarter for syntax. There are other places in the
> grammar having "with clauses" and multiple arguments or subclauses, and
> having the shift/reduce issues resolved...
>
The syntax of the CREATE SCHEMA SQL standard command is
CREATE SCHEMA AUTHORIZATION userid
Shouldn't we be using
CREATE DATABASE AUTHORIZATION userid
to be consistent?
--
Fernando Nasser
Red Hat Canada Ltd. E-Mail: fnasser(at)redhat(dot)com
2323 Yonge Street, Suite #300
Toronto, Ontario M4P 2C9
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2002-02-25 01:24:49 | Re: [HACKERS] Updated TODO item |
Previous Message | Lee Harr | 2002-02-25 00:58:32 | missing foreign key fails silently using COPY |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2002-02-25 01:11:57 | Re: Basic DOMAIN Support |
Previous Message | Rod Taylor | 2002-02-24 23:34:42 | Basic DOMAIN Support |