| From: | Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Hans-Jürgen Schönig <postgres(at)cybertec(dot)at>, Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>, pgsql-patches(at)postgresql(dot)org, eg(at)cybertec(dot)at |
| Subject: | Re: CREATE SYNONYM ... |
| Date: | 2006-03-14 16:44:51 |
| Message-ID: | 4416F303.9030801@dunslane.net |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-patches |
Tom Lane wrote:
>=?ISO-8859-1?Q?Hans-J=FCrgen_Sch=F6nig?= <postgres(at)cybertec(dot)at> writes:
>
>
>>Peter Eisentraut wrote:
>>
>>
>>>Does any SQL-like database system other than Oracle have this feature?
>>>
>>>
>
>
>
>>the most popular are: db2, max db, informix, ms sql.
>>in other words: all databases which are widely used and widely accepted.
>>
>>
>
>That argument only holds water if they all support it with the same
>semantics, a fact not in evidence. I'm not impressed by whether they
>all have things they call synonyms, unless they all work alike. What
>are their approaches to permissions? What happens if the referenced
>object is dropped or modified? Can you make a synonym to something that
>doesn't exist yet? What sorts of objects can have synonyms?
>
>
>
>
"all" might also be a bit of an overstatement. AFAIK Sybase at least
doesn't have these.
Even if they don't all have precisely the same semantics, though, is
there an objection in principle to providing synonyms?
cheers
andrew
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2006-03-14 17:18:56 | Re: CREATE SYNONYM ... |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2006-03-14 16:29:37 | Re: CREATE SYNONYM ... |