Re: Operators and schemas

Tom Lane wrote:
> 
> 1. Keep operators as database-wide objects, instead of putting them into
> namespaces.  This seems a bit silly though: if the types and functions
> that underlie an operator are private to a namespace, shouldn't the
> operator be as well?
> 

Not necessarily.  One can still create a type and functions to operate 
on them.  Operators are a convenience, not a necessity (except for 
indices extensions).

If some types are really important and operators are desired, it can be
coordinated with the DBA as operators would be a database wide resource.
(This would be the case if indices extensions were involved anyway).

I would keep operators database-wide.  

-- 
Fernando Nasser
Red Hat - Toronto                       E-Mail:  fnasser@redhat.com
2323 Yonge Street, Suite #300
Toronto, Ontario   M4P 2C9