Re: RFD: schemas and different kinds of Postgres objects

From: Bill Studenmund <wrstuden(at)netbsd(dot)org>
To: Hiroshi Inoue <Inoue(at)tpf(dot)co(dot)jp>
Cc: Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, PostgreSQL Development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org>
Subject: Re: RFD: schemas and different kinds of Postgres objects
Date: 2002-01-30 20:08:54
Message-ID: Pine.NEB.4.33.0201301207540.26920-100000@vespasia.home-net.internetconnect.net
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Wed, 30 Jan 2002, Hiroshi Inoue wrote:

> Bill Studenmund wrote:
> >
> > On Tue, 29 Jan 2002, Hiroshi Inoue wrote:
> > SQL99 doesn't have tables in there
> > AFAICT, but I think it makes sense.
>
> It seems to make sense but they are different and
> our *path* is never an extension of SQL-path.
> Where are the difference or the relevance referred
> to in this thread ?

How is our path not an extention of SQL-path? Or at least how is the path
I've been pushing not an SQL-path?

Take care,

Bill

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Dave Page 2002-01-30 20:16:21 Re: [ADMIN] postgresql under Windows is slow
Previous Message Hannu Krosing 2002-01-30 20:06:31 Array aggregation. Was: PostgreSQL Final Release ... Monday?