RE: AW: Big 7.1 open items
От | Peter Mount |
---|---|
Тема | RE: AW: Big 7.1 open items |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 1B3D5E532D18D311861A00600865478CF1AFCE@exchange1.nt.maidstone.gov.uk обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | AW: Big 7.1 open items (Zeugswetter Andreas SB <ZeugswetterA@wien.spardat.at>) |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
The SQL7 way is the schema is the username, with the exception of "dba" - it's used as a "global" schema. -- Peter Mount Enterprise Support Maidstone Borough Council Any views stated are my own, and not those of Maidstone Borough Council -----Original Message----- From: Hiroshi Inoue [mailto:Inoue@tpf.co.jp] Sent: Thursday, June 29, 2000 9:22 AM To: Zeugswetter Andreas SB Cc: PostgreSQL-development Subject: RE: AW: [HACKERS] Big 7.1 open items > -----Original Message----- > From: pgsql-hackers-owner@hub.org [mailto:pgsql-hackers-owner@hub.org]On > Behalf Of Zeugswetter Andreas SB > > > > > AFAIK,schema is independent from user in SQL92. > > > > So default_tablespace_per_user doesn't necessarily imply > > > > default_tablespace_per_schema. > > > > > > Well, sombody must be interpreting this wrong, because > > > in Informix and Oracle the schema corresponds to the owner > > > and they say they conform to ansi in this regard. > > > > Is there really a schema:user=1:1 limitation in SQL-92 ? > > Though both SQL-86 and SQL-89 had the limitation > > SQL-92 removed it AFAIK. > > As I said in another posting a user does not need to exist > for each schema. The dba can create objects under any > schema name. > Sorry for my poor understanding. What I meant was that SQL92 allows the following. schema owner---------------------------schema1 user1schema2 user1schema3 user2schema4 user3schema5 user3schema6 user3 Is my understaning same as yours ? Regards. Hiroshi Inoue Inoue@tpf.co.jp
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: