Re: RFD: schemas and different kinds of Postgres objects

From: Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: <pgsql-hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org>
Subject: Re: RFD: schemas and different kinds of Postgres objects
Date: 2002-01-22 23:18:38
Message-ID: Pine.LNX.4.30.0201221816130.686-100000@peter.localdomain
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Tom Lane writes:

> I don't buy that premise. It's true that SQL92 equates ownership of a
> schema with ownership of the objects therein, but AFAICS we have no hope
> of being forward-compatible with existing database setups (wherein there
> can be multiple tables of different ownership all in a single namespace)
> if we don't allow varying ownership within a schema.

We could have a Boolean knob that says "if you don't find the object in
the default schema, search all other schemas". That should provide all
the backward compatibility we need. Moreover, I figure if we do it that
way, the whole schema implementation reduces itself mostly to parser work,
no complicated system catalog changes, no complex overhaul of the
privilege system -- at least initially.

--
Peter Eisentraut peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Peter Eisentraut 2002-01-22 23:27:35 Re: RFD: schemas and different kinds of Postgres objects
Previous Message Tom Lane 2002-01-22 23:18:15 Re: Cross posting