Received: from sss.pgh.pa.us ([192.204.191.242]) by postgresql.org (8.11.3/8.11.4) with ESMTP id g0NJvXl94681 for ; Wed, 23 Jan 2002 14:57:33 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us) Received: from sss2.sss.pgh.pa.us (tgl@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by sss.pgh.pa.us (8.11.4/8.11.4) with ESMTP id g0NJvEf05081; Wed, 23 Jan 2002 14:57:14 -0500 (EST) To: Bill Studenmund cc: Peter Eisentraut , pgsql-hackers@postgreSQL.org Subject: Re: RFD: schemas and different kinds of Postgres objects In-reply-to: References: Comments: In-reply-to Bill Studenmund message dated "Wed, 23 Jan 2002 11:34:23 -0800" Date: Wed, 23 Jan 2002 14:57:14 -0500 Message-ID: <5078.1011815834@sss.pgh.pa.us> From: Tom Lane X-Archive-Number: 200201/1077 X-Sequence-Number: 18059 Bill Studenmund writes: > One of the things schemas have to support is essentially a PATH specifier. Yes, but... > 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. When you create a new user, do all those path specifiers for the existing users magically update themselves? Seems like maintenance would be a pain. Fernando's "any" idea is probably a cleaner way to handle it if we wanted to do things like that. But I still think it'll be safer and more controllable if we provide a "public" namespace instead; see followup discussions. regards, tom lane