Re: AW: Unhappy thoughts about pg_dump and objects inherited from template1 - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Philip Warner
Subject Re: AW: Unhappy thoughts about pg_dump and objects inherited from template1
Date
Msg-id 3.0.5.32.20001110025337.0340f350@mail.rhyme.com.au
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: AW: Unhappy thoughts about pg_dump and objects inherited from template1  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Responses Re: AW: Unhappy thoughts about pg_dump and objects inherited from template1  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Re: AW: Unhappy thoughts about pg_dump and objects inherited from template1  (Pete Forman <pete.forman@westgeo.com>)
Re: AW: Unhappy thoughts about pg_dump and objects inherited from template1  ("Ross J. Reedstrom" <reedstrm@rice.edu>)
List pgsql-hackers
At 10:36 9/11/00 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
>Philip Warner <pjw@rhyme.com.au> writes:
>> Presumably this was raised before, but I'd love to see the consensus view,
>> if it is documented.
>
>AFAIR, the discussion trailed off without any specific decisions being
>made.  One of the things that's still very open in my mind is whether
>we want to keep the existing notion of independent databases within an
>installation, and if so how that maps onto the SQL-defined concepts.
>To me, though, the point of independent databases is that they be
>*independent*,

I agree; it's a pain that one DB misbehaving kills an entire installation.


>and therefore if we keep them I'd vote for mapping them
>to the top-level SQL notion (catalog, you said?).  Schemas ought to be
>substructure within a database.

I think the hierarchy goes:
   Environment->Catalog->Schema

From what I can tell:

1. the environment contains truly general things like the SQL parser, the
tools for connecting to the DB etc - which I assume also contains the
user-authorization stuff.

2. The catalog contains multiple schemas (this is the top level as far as
data definitions go, I think). Some predefined schemas (eg. the
DEFINITION_SCHEMA) contain views that allow querying of all schema
definitions in the catalog.

3. Schemas are what we call databases. They contain tables, views wtc.

The SQL standard is careful to avoid using the term database in these
discussions, though at one point it does equate 'database' with the part of
the environment that contains the actual SQL data (as opposed to metadata).
It's a pretty broad definition, and contrary to most peoples expections, I
think. Perhaps I'm wrong, but I think most people will equate database with
a schema (ie. the thing in which you define tables).


----------------------------------------------------------------
Philip Warner                    |     __---_____
Albatross Consulting Pty. Ltd.   |----/       -  \
(A.B.N. 75 008 659 498)          |          /(@)   ______---_
Tel: (+61) 0500 83 82 81         |                 _________  \
Fax: (+61) 0500 83 82 82         |                 ___________ |
Http://www.rhyme.com.au          |                /           \|                                |    --________--
PGP key available upon request,  |  /
and from pgp5.ai.mit.edu:11371   |/


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Zeugswetter Andreas SB
Date:
Subject: AW: AW: Unhappy thoughts about pg_dump and objects inhe rited from template1
Next
From: Philip Warner
Date:
Subject: Re: Question about reliability?