Message-ID: <20040610143454.13820.qmail@web13804.mail.yahoo.com>
Date: Thu, 10 Jun 2004 07:34:54 -0700 (PDT)
From: Chris Gamache <cgg007@yahoo.com>
Reply-To: cgg007@yahoo.com
Subject: Re: Schema + User-Defined Data Type Indexing problems... 
To: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Cc: pgsql-sql@postgresql.org
In-Reply-To: <24190.1086876593@sss.pgh.pa.us>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii

--- Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
> In practice I'm not sure that this is really a situation that we need to
> fret about, because using a datatype that isn't in your search path has
> got notational problems that are orders of magnitude worse than this
> one.  The functions and operators that do something useful with the
> datatype would also have to be schema-qualified every time you use them.
> This is perhaps tolerable for functions but it's quite unpleasant for
> operators :-(  You can't write
> 	select * from foo where my_uuid = 'xxx';
> instead
> 	select * from foo where my_uuid operator(my_schema.=) 'xxx';
> Yech.  I think you'll end up putting uuid's schema in your search path
> before long anyway.

Right you are. I guess the moral of the story is that when using custom
datatypes, search_path is a required setting. I guess that is why the "public"
schema should be just that, completely accessable by any user with rights to
the DB. So, is the best-practice for the my_schema tables to reference the
user-defined datatype in the "public" schema?

CREATE TABLE my_schema.foo (uuid public.uniqueidentifier);


__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Friends.  Fun.  Try the all-new Yahoo! Messenger.
http://messenger.yahoo.com/