Re: What's the CURRENT schema ?

Tom Lane wrote:
>
> Hiroshi Inoue <Inoue(at)tpf(dot)co(dot)jp> writes:
> > Oh I see but I think using the search SCHEMA path for
> > table name resolution is harmful.
>
> Huh? That's more or less the entire *point* of these changes, IMHO.
> What's harmful about having a search path?

I don't object to use a search path to resolve unqualified
function, type etc names. But it is very siginificant for
users to be able to be sure what tables they are handling.
Where's the necessity to use a common search path to resolve
table and other objects' name in the first place ? I don't
know any OS commands which use the command search path to
resolve ordinary file name.

We(at least I)'ve been often confused and damaged even when
using OS's command search path. Does the flexibilty worth
the risk ? The damage would be immeasurable if unexpected
tables are chosen. Would PostgreSQL be a dbms unavailable
for careless users like me ?

regards,
Hiroshi Inoue