| 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: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | 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? |