From: | Sailesh Krishnamurthy <sailesh(at)cs(dot)berkeley(dot)edu> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | bruc(at)acm(dot)org, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Are we losing momentum? |
Date: | 2003-04-16 00:50:59 |
Message-ID: | bxywuhv2rkc.fsf@datafix.CS.Berkeley.EDU |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
>>>>> "Tom" == Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> writes:
Tom> Please keep in mind that I was replying to a poster who said
Tom> "cross-db queries on the same server (meaning same
Tom> postmaster, for our purposes) are trivial; why hasn't
Tom> Postgres got them when everybody else does?"
BTW, DB2 doesn't have 'em either.
In DB2, you have Database -> Schema -> Objects
In DB2, you can of course have cross-schema queries but no cross-db
queries, unless you rig up the federated functionality to connect one
db to the other.
Much of the confusion stems from SQL-Server and Sybase having:
Database -> Objects
The Database is used to identify distinct schemas. I'm not sure if in
these systems they are physically separate entities (different lock
manager etc.)
--
Peace, at last ?
Sailesh
http://www.cs.berkeley.edu/~sailesh
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tatsuo Ishii | 2003-04-16 01:09:38 | Re: GLOBAL vs LOCAL temp tables |
Previous Message | cbbrowne | 2003-04-16 00:28:25 | Re: Are we losing momentum? |