From: | Bill Studenmund <wrstuden(at)netbsd(dot)org> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>, <pgsql-hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: RFD: schemas and different kinds of Postgres objects |
Date: | 2002-01-23 19:34:23 |
Message-ID: | Pine.NEB.4.33.0201221710360.5119-100000@vespasia.home-net.internetconnect.net |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Mon, 21 Jan 2002, Tom Lane wrote:
> Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> writes:
> > Remember that a schema is a named representation of ownership, so anything
> > that can be owned must be in a schema. (Unless you want to invent a
> > parallel universe for a different kind of ownership, which would be
> > incredibly confusing.)
>
> 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. I think we can
> arrange things so that we are upward compatible with both SQL92 and
> the old way. Haven't worked out details yet though.
Yes we most certianly can! :-)
One of the things schemas have to support is essentially a PATH specifier.
So all we need to do is have all of the schemas created in a new DB have
path specifiers pulling in all of the other schemas. Thus we can make a
schema-savy system act as if it has only one namespace.
Back when Zembu was paying me to work on this, I envisioned a script or
tool you'd feed a DB dump, and it would do the schema fixup, including
adding PATH directives to all schemas, so they all see everything.
Since you have to pg_dump when updating, all this adds is running one tool
during an upgrade. And then existing apps would work. :-)
Take care,
Bill
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Vsevolod Lobko | 2002-01-23 19:34:31 | Re: pltcl build problem on FreeBSD (was: Re: pltlc and pltlcu problems) |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2002-01-23 19:15:21 | Re: LWLock contention: I think I understand the problem |