Mike Mascari <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I don't even know if "." is allowed in the schema names,
It isn't, and we couldn't invent such a scheme without seriously
diverging from SQL compliance: the next naming level up from schemas is
reserved for catalogs (think databases). I don't know that we'll ever
support cross-database access, but we shouldn't foreclose the
possibility in pursuit of a naming scheme that doesn't really add very
much value.
You could possibly fake it with schema names like org_postgresql_foo,
but I can't get very excited about that ...
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
