From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> |
Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Operators and schemas |
Date: | 2002-04-16 04:21:37 |
Message-ID: | 9171.1018930897@sss.pgh.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> writes:
> I had imagined that pg_dump would emit commands such as this:
> CREATE SCHEMA foo
> CREATE TABLE bar ( ... )
> CREATE otherthings
> ;
> which is how I read the SQL standard. Are there plans to implement the
> CREATE SCHEMA command that way? I think I recall someone from Toronto
> mentioning something along these lines.
We have portions of that now, but I don't think there is any serious
intent to support *all* Postgres CREATE statements inside CREATE SCHEMA.
Because there are no semicolons in there, allowing random statements in
CREATE SCHEMA tends to force promotion of keywords to full-reserved
status (so you can tell where each sub-statement starts). My
inclination is to allow the minimum necessary for SQL spec compliance.
(Fernando, your thoughts here?)
>> Given the present semantics of
>> search_path, that will imply an implicit search of pg_catalog before
>> foo.
> Interesting ... Is that only temporary? (since you say "present"
> semantics)
Only meant to imply "it hasn't been seriously reviewed, so someone
might have a better idea". At the moment I'm happy with it.
regards, tom lane
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2002-04-16 04:34:02 | Re: multibyte support by default |
Previous Message | Peter Eisentraut | 2002-04-16 04:20:25 | Re: ANSI Compliant Inserts |