Tom Lane wrote: > Rod Taylor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > >> There are some nontrivial issues to be thought about here, like under > >> what conditions "CREATE SCHEMA foo" ought to create a top-level schema > >> versus creating a schema under some other schema that we are pretending > >> is the active "catalog". But it seems on first glance like something > >> could be worked out. > > > Just go the extra info and call the top level catalogs in the commands > > as well: > > Nope, doesn't meet the spec requirements. One thing we can certainly > say is that there would have to be a notion of an "active catalog" > (which could be determined by outside-the-spec means, perhaps a GUC > variable) because "CREATE SCHEMA foo" would have to create foo as a > child of the active catalog. > > I'm also fairly unclear on what this implies for search_path searches. > Currently, as soon as you have more than one dotted name, search_path > is ignored ... but should it be used? Maybe "a.b" ought to be sought > as "foo.a.b" for successive values of "foo" from the search path.
How is a catalog different from a schema? -- Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us pgman@candle.pha.pa.us | (610) 359-1001 + If your life is a hard drive, | 13 Roberts Road + Christ can be your backup. | Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073 ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 5: Have you checked our extensive FAQ? http://www.postgresql.org/docs/faq
