| From: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>, Alexey Klyukin <alexk(at)commandprompt(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Another proposal for table synonyms |
| Date: | 2010-12-02 20:27:01 |
| Message-ID: | AANLkTinfPMrY5m9YFaWodL+LRctZeRDKfJ5+aANtr3Pe@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, Dec 1, 2010 at 3:55 PM, Alvaro Herrera
<alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com> wrote:
> Excerpts from Josh Berkus's message of mié dic 01 17:13:35 -0300 2010:
>>
>> > Well, porting applications from other database systems that support synonyms
>> > (i.e. Oracle, DB2, SQL Server).
>>
>> SQL Server supports synonyms? If it's not Oracle-only, it's a more
>> powerful argument to have the feature.
>
> I think it's worth mentioning that in SQL Server, synonyms are not
> schema-qualified; they're "global" objects.
Seems like they have more than one kind.
http://download.oracle.com/docs/cd/B19306_01/server.102/b14200/statements_7001.htm
The section entitled "notes on public synonyms" is particularly
interesting, as it seems to imply that under some but not all
conditions synonyms get materialized inside schemas that use them.
The list of objects for which they support synonyms is also
interesting.
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Alvaro Herrera | 2010-12-02 20:43:50 | Re: Another proposal for table synonyms |
| Previous Message | Heikki Linnakangas | 2010-12-02 19:52:27 | Re: directory archive format for pg_dump |