What object types should be in schemas?

From: Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>
To: pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: What object types should be in schemas?
Date: 2023-01-11 15:32:57
Message-ID: 422c5d78-839f-8232-cd16-a887979ef901@enterprisedb.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

The current hierarchy of object types is like this:

database
access method
event trigger
extension
foreign data wrapper
foreign server
language
publication
schema
aggregate
collation
conversion
domain
function/procedure
index
operator
operator class
operator family
sequence
statistics
table/view
policy
rule
trigger
text search configuration
text search dictionary
text search parser
text search template
type
subscription
role
tablespace

special:
- cast
- transform
- user mapping

How does one decide whether something should be in a schema or not? The
current state feels intuitively correct, but I can't determine any firm
way to decide.

Over in the column encryption thread, the patch proposes to add various
key types as new object types. For simplicity, I just stuck them
directly under database, but I don't know whether that is correct.

Thoughts?

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Robert Treat 2023-01-11 15:47:54 Re: doc: mentioned CREATE+ATTACH PARTITION as an alternative to CREATE TABLE..PARTITION OF
Previous Message Drouvot, Bertrand 2023-01-11 15:23:34 Re: Minimal logical decoding on standbys