Fernando Nasser <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Tom Lane wrote:
>> I've been vacillating about whether to choose another name for the
>> public namespace to avoid the need for quotes here. I can't think
>> of another good name :-(
> For the special schemas, we have pg_catalog, (pg_temp, pg_toast ?),
> so pg_public could do the trick.
Actually that was my initial choice of name, but I changed my mind
later. The reason is that the dbadmin should be able to restrict or
even delete the public namespace if his usage plans for the database
don't allow any shared objects. If we call it pg_public then the system
will think it is a reserved namespace, and we'd have to put in a special
case to allow it to be deleted (not to mention recreated again, should
the DBA change his mind later).
The public namespace isn't really special and so it should not be named
like a system-reserved namespace. IMHO anyway...
regards, tom lane
---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 3: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate
subscribe-nomail command to [EMAIL PROTECTED] so that your
message can get through to the mailing list cleanly
