Re: Using tables in other PostGreSQL database - Mailing list pgsql-general

From Adrian Klaver
Subject Re: Using tables in other PostGreSQL database
Date
Msg-id 200804010729.34730.aklaver@comcast.net
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Using tables in other PostGreSQL database  ("Pettis, Barry" <Barry.Pettis@atmel.com>)
Responses Re: Using tables in other PostGreSQL database  ("Pettis, Barry" <Barry.Pettis@atmel.com>)
List pgsql-general
On Monday 31 March 2008 4:20 am, Pettis, Barry wrote:
> Wow seems like this post took on a life of it's own.  All I wanted to do
> was to be able to use a table that someone else has all ready created.
> Seems like somewhere someone mentioned a DBA ( which I'm assuming to be
> "Database Administrator" ) well as far as I know we don't have one
> though I wish we did.
>
> The basis of my question comes from the fact that I currently use
> "Multiple" access databases.  Each database contains 1 piece of
> information ( information that on it's own has no relationship to other
> data ), but information in other databases will use items from it in it.
> Hence in MSAccess I "LINK" the tables in.  Which I know is nothing more
> than a connection.

Now I am confused. If the data has no relationship to other data why do you
need to link to it? Second in your original post you said you where trying to
pull data from multiple Postgres databases now you say you are using multiple
Access databases.

>
> I wish I could say that I knew with certainty what schemas are or 2PC
> is.  Would be nice if I had exposure to other databases as well.  I'm
> sure that I'd have the same questions about MSft's SQL server.
>
> But I thank the forum here for all the input.
>
> Regards,
> Barry Pettis
>
> CSO Atmel Corp
> Project Tech
>

> http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-general

--
Adrian Klaver
aklaver@comcast.net

pgsql-general by date:

Previous
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: simple update queries take a long time - postgres 8.3.1
Next
From: Simon Riggs
Date:
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] ANALYZE getting dead tuple count hopelessly wrong