On Mon, Dec 21, 2009 at 6:14 PM, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > Scott Marlowe <scott.marl...@gmail.com> writes: >> On Mon, Dec 21, 2009 at 6:10 PM, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: >>> Well, yes, because only the first one is visible. The second one is >>> masked by the first. > >> But the docs say that ALL objects in the schema path will be shown. >> So, my point stands, either the docs are wrong, or the behaviour is. >> I'd think it's the docs. > > It says the *visible* objects will be shown. Ones that are masked > aren't any more visible than if they were in some other schema > altogether: either way, if you want to reference such an object in > a SQL statement, you'd have to schema-qualify it.
Ahh, right, it's about visibility. Hadn't caught that part. -- Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-general
