Re: RFD: schemas and different kinds of Postgres objects
От | Peter Eisentraut |
---|---|
Тема | Re: RFD: schemas and different kinds of Postgres objects |
Дата | |
Msg-id | Pine.LNX.4.30.0201230058150.686-100000@peter.localdomain обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: RFD: schemas and different kinds of Postgres objects (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>) |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Tom Lane writes: > > Actually functions do have to be schema local. It's in the spec (don't > > have exactly where with me). > > (A) I don't believe that; please cite chapter and verse; In SQL99, chapter 4 verse 23 it says "An SQL-invoked routine is an element of an SQL-schema and is called a schema-level routine." > (B) even if > SQL92 thinks that's okay, we can't do it that way because of > backwards-compatibility issues. I don't buy that. If all you're looking for is preserving foo.bar <==> bar(foo) for compatibility, then you can simply say that "bar" cannot be schema-qualified in the left form (so it needs to live in the current or the default schema). We currently only have one default schema, so that's backward compatible. I think this syntax is a mistake, so I don't feel compelled to provide more than backwards compatibility. -- Peter Eisentraut peter_e@gmx.net
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: