Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: RFD: schemas and different kinds of Postgres objects

From: Gavin Sherry <swm(at)linuxworld(dot)com(dot)au>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Bill Studenmund <wrstuden(at)netbsd(dot)org>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: RFD: schemas and different kinds of Postgres objects
Date: 2002-01-25 04:25:05
Message-ID: Pine.LNX.4.21.0201251517350.12632-100000@linuxworld.com.au (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers
On Wed, 23 Jan 2002, Tom Lane wrote:

> If you use only the SQL-defined operations, after setting up any
> configuration variables we may invent in the way we will document as
> necessary for SQL-compatible behavior, then you will get SQL-compatible
> behavior.  I do not think that precludes having an underlying
> implementation that sees the world differently than SQL does and
> supports non-SQL behaviors too.  (For that matter, I'm sure there is
> text somewhere in the spec that points out that the spec intends to
> define user-visible behavior, not implementation.)

This makes a lot of sense and suggests the possibility of 'schema enabled'
databases. That is, a switch 'bool withschemas' (which defaults to
false) could be added to pg_database. If true, the parser and ownership
model reflects that of SQL'99 and/or the Postgres schema model. If false,
the existing 'schema' model is assumed.

This should allow existing users to migrate their data and applications to
7.3 without having to modify either.

Its not an ideal solution but backward compatibility is generally results
in compromise ;).

Gavin


In response to

Responses

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Bruce MomjianDate: 2002-01-25 04:33:52
Subject: Re: RFD: schemas and different kinds of Postgres objects
Previous:From: Tom LaneDate: 2002-01-25 04:23:39
Subject: Re: RFD: schemas and different kinds of Postgres objects

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2014 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group