From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
To: Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net>
Cc: pgsql-hackers@postgreSQL.org
Subject: Re: RFD: schemas and different kinds of Postgres objects
Date: Tue, 22 Jan 2002 18:31:08 -0500
Message-ID: <29288.1011742268@sss.pgh.pa.us> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.30.0201221816130.686-100000@peter.localdomain>
References: <Pine.LNX.4.30.0201221816130.686-100000@peter.localdomain>
Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net> writes:
> 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.
Why are you guys so eager to save me work? I'm not in the least
interested in implementing a "schema" feature that can only handle
the entry-level user == schema case. Therefore, just relabeling the
owner column as schema isn't an interesting option.
I really don't see what's wrong with building a namespace mechanism
that is orthogonal to ownership and then using that to implement what
SQL92 wants. I think this will be cleaner, simpler, and more flexible
than trying to equate ownership with namespace.
regards, tom lane
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Reply to all the recipients using the --to and --cc options:
reply via email
To: pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
Cc: tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us, peter_e@gmx.net
Subject: Re: RFD: schemas and different kinds of Postgres objects
In-Reply-To: <29288.1011742268@sss.pgh.pa.us>
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
This inbox is served by DDX for PostgreSQL; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox