| From: | Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Christopher Kings-Lynne <chriskl(at)familyhealth(dot)com(dot)au>, Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>, <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: A couple of TODO notes |
| Date: | 2003-10-20 05:29:09 |
| Message-ID: | Pine.LNX.4.44.0310200728050.16235-100000@peter.localdomain |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Tom Lane writes:
> >> o Add SET SCHEMA
> >>
> >> What is this supposed to do (and how's it different from SET SEARCH_PATH)?
>
> > I believe someone thought it was the SQL standard way of doing it.
> > Probably needs to be checked though.
>
> I can find no mention of it in SQL99. Given that the spec regards
> schemas and users as nearly the same thing, I'd guess that SET SESSION
> AUTHORIZATION is probably what they'd expect to do this.
SQL99 has SET PATH (part 5, clause 14.4).
--
Peter Eisentraut peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Hannu Krosing | 2003-10-20 07:22:29 | Re: Unicode upper() bug still present |
| Previous Message | Sailesh Krishnamurthy | 2003-10-20 05:26:50 | Re: Dreaming About Redesigning SQL |