RE: AW: Big 7.1 open items

From: "Hiroshi Inoue" <Inoue(at)tpf(dot)co(dot)jp>
To: "Zeugswetter Andreas SB" <ZeugswetterA(at)wien(dot)spardat(dot)at>
Cc: "PostgreSQL-development" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: RE: AW: Big 7.1 open items
Date: 2000-06-28 17:05:31
Message-ID: EKEJJICOHDIEMGPNIFIJMEHBCCAA.Inoue@tpf.co.jp
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Zeugswetter Andreas SB
>
> > AFAIK,schema is independent from user in SQL92.
> > So default_tablespace_per_user doesn't necessarily imply
> > default_tablespace_per_schema.
>
> Well, sombody must be interpreting this wrong, because
> in Informix and Oracle the schema corresponds to the owner
> and they say they conform to ansi in this regard.

Is there really a schema:user=1:1 limitation in SQL-92 ?
Though both SQL-86 and SQL-89 had the limitation
SQL-92 removed it AFAIK.

Regards.

Hiroshi Inoue

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Ross J. Reedstrom 2000-06-28 17:19:54 Re: AW: Big 7.1 open items
Previous Message Tom Lane 2000-06-28 17:04:27 Misc. consequences of backend memory management changes