On May 29, 2009, at 5:16 PM, Greg Stark wrote:
On Fri, May 29, 2009 at 11:03 PM, David E. Wheeler > wrote:
On May 29, 2009, at 2:52 PM, Josh Berkus wrote:
a) the ability to "push" a schema onto the current search path
b) the ability to "pull" a schema off the current search path
push, pop, s
On Fri, May 29, 2009 at 10:52 PM, Josh Berkus wrote:
> Sometimes one needs to use schemas just for namespacing (they are called
> "namespaces" after all), and not for security or visibility.
What's the point of "namespaces" if not to implement visibility? The
interesting thing to do would be to
On Fri, May 29, 2009 at 11:03 PM, David E. Wheeler wrote:
> On May 29, 2009, at 2:52 PM, Josh Berkus wrote:
>
>> a) the ability to "push" a schema onto the current search path
>> b) the ability to "pull" a schema off the current search path
>
> push, pop, shift, unshift. :-)
>
> Come to think of i
On May 29, 2009, at 2:52 PM, Josh Berkus wrote:
a) the ability to "push" a schema onto the current search path
b) the ability to "pull" a schema off the current search path
push, pop, shift, unshift. :-)
Come to think of it, I want these for arrays, too. ;-)
Best,
David
--
Sent via pgsql-h
Greg,
Do we really? The only reason people are having trouble managing their
search_path is because they're not using it as intended and putting
things in lots of different schemas that they intend to all be
visible.
Apparently you've never adminned a database with hundreds (or thousands)
of
