Re: Search Path vs Synonyms

From: "Albe Laurenz" <laurenz(dot)albe(at)wien(dot)gv(dot)at>
To: "Matthew Seaborn *EXTERN*" <Matthew(dot)Seaborn(at)performgroup(dot)com>, <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Search Path vs Synonyms
Date: 2009-07-24 06:22:29
Message-ID: D960CB61B694CF459DCFB4B0128514C203937E5F@exadv11.host.magwien.gv.at
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general

Matthew Seaborn wrote:
> Given the situation where a user connecting to the database
> needs access to two separate schemas: the primary schema
> which contains the data they will be updating and a second
> schema which contains read-only reference data, used by many
> users, that will be using in joins on queries.
>
> I don't want to have to use fully qualified names (I am
> migrating code from Oracle which uses synonyms), so what is
> the best way (in both performance and reliability) to refer
> to the tables; Search Path or Synonyms?

There are no synonyms in PostgreSQL: synonyms are Oracle's way
of search_path (though more selective).

You excluded the best solution, namely to qualify the objects.

If your user should be able to access *all* tables in both
schemas unqualified and there are no name collisions between
objects in the schemas, I would recommend search_path.

Otherwise, use views.

Yours,
Laurenz Albe

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Matthew Seaborn 2009-07-24 07:38:23 Re: Search Path vs Synonyms
Previous Message martin 2009-07-24 04:42:44 Converting SQL to pg