Re: Operators and schemas

-----Original Message-----
From: Peter Eisentraut [mailto:peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net]
Sent: Tuesday, April 16, 2002 3:33 PM
To: Fernando Nasser
Cc: Tom Lane; pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Operators and schemas

Fernando Nasser writes:

> I agree. And for Entry level SQL'92 we are done -- only tables,
views
> and grants are required. The multiple schemas per user is already
> an intermediate SQL feature -- for intermediate SQL'92 we would still
> need domains and a character set specification.
>
> For SQL'99, we would have to add types, functions and triggers
> (only triggers are not part of Core SQL'99, but I would not leave them
out).

I can hardly believe that we want to implement this just to be able to
check off a few boxes on the SQL-compliance test. Once you have the
ability to use a fixed list of statements in this context it should be
easy to allow a more or less arbitrary list. Especially if they all
start
with the same key word it should be possible to parse this.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Items like "schema" are a part of the language for a reason. Being
able to create a schema in an area called 'test' and another in an area
called 'development' and yet another in an area called 'production' is
a key feature for real business usefulness.

IMO-YMMV.
<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<