> -----Original Message----- > From: Fernando Nasser > > Hiroshi Inoue wrote: > > > > > We can't do that. Accordingly to the SQL if you are user HIROSHI > > > and write "SELECT * FROM a;" the table is actually "HIROSHI.a". > > > > > > This must work for people who are using SQL-schemas in their databases > > > or we would have a non-conforming implementation of SCHEMAS > (would make > > > the whole exercise pointless IMO). > > > > Schema name isn't necessarily a user id since SQL-92 > > though SQL-86 and SQL-89 had and probably Oracle still > > has the limitation. As far as I see PostgreSQL's schema > > support wouldn't have the limitation. Probably I wouldn't > > create the schema HIROSHI using PostgreSQL. When > > I used Oracle I really disliked the limitation. > > > > You misunderstood what I've said. You may have how many schemas > you please. But you will have to refer to their objects specifying > the schema name explicitly. The only cases where you can omit the > schema name are (accordingly to the SQL'99 standard):
Please tell me where's the description in SQL99 ? I wasn't able to find it unfortunately. regards, Hiroshi Inoue ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 1: subscribe and unsubscribe commands go to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
