"Ross J. Reedstrom" <reedstrm@wallace.ece.rice.edu> writes:
> This notation, db.table.field, does seem to be how other DBMSs do
> it. I've been wondering, however, if our parser would have any trouble
> with it, since in an identifier string token1.token2, token1 is no longer
> guaranteed to be a table.
The parser would indeed get confused, since multiple dots is an old and
still-supported PostQUEL notation for some sort of function invocation
(can't say that I fully understand it). I suppose we could rip that out
without drawing too many complaints. However, parser problems would be
the least of the worries in supporting multiple-database access within a
single backend. We're talking about a major project here, and I'm not
seeing value in it proportional to the work required. If you don't want
to have multiple backend connections open in a client, why not refactor
your database layout so that all the stuff you need is in one database?
regards, tom lane
************
