----- Original Message -----
From: Bill Studenmund <wrstuden@netbsd.org>
Sent: Friday, October 19, 2001 2:04 PM
> > > It means that when you want to use one of the built in functions
> > > (date_part, abs, floor, sqrt etc.) you don't have to prefix it with
> > > "standard.". You can just say date_part(), abs(), floor(), sqrt(), etc.
> > > The only time you need to prefix a call with "standard." is if you want to
> > > exclude any so-named routines in your own package.
> >
> > Quick question: would it be possible then create a 'system' package
> > and 'system' (or 'master' if you will) schema (when it's implemented),
> > move over all the system tables (pg_*) into the master schema
> > and functions into the 'system' package, so that no name conflicts will arise
> > when creating types, functions, tables, etc with the same names as system ones?
>
> Yes. That is part of my plan actually. :-)
Hmm. I see. Then there won't be a problem of creating any DB object
with the system name.
> In the patch I sent in last week,
Yeah, I remember that one. Took me a couple of minutes
to download. You know, it never hurts to compress things:
then the patch would be ~10 times less in size, and you wouldn't
have to worry about PINE messing up with your code in the message body... :)
And that would reduce the bounce rate too.
Just a kind and gentle cry to reduce the size of patches sent to
my mailbox and save some bandwidth on the way :)
> all of the built-in functions and
> aggregates are in the "standard" package, and you can infact reference
> them as standard.foo.
When you refer to it just foo(), and you have foo() defined
in more than one package, how do you resolve this? Do you also have
a notion of a global package and sub-packages?
--
Serguei