Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> Jonah H. Harris wrote:
>
>
>>Now, one may argue that it's incorrect/bad application-design to not use
>>fully qualified names, however, there are cases (especially in VERY large
>>database applications) where you do not want to use fully qualified naming.
>>In PostgreSQL, the alternative to synonyms is to have a monstrous search
>>path $user, public, HR, AP, AR, GL, FA, COMMON... Not that we have Oracle
>>Applications running on PostgreSQL, but 11i has something like 130+? schemas
>>which would be pretty nasty and semi-unprofessional as a search_path rather
>>than as something defined similar to synonyms.
>
>
> Well, if you don't want to have a monstrous search path with 130+
> schemas, then you'll have a monstrous amount of synonyms. Given that
> schemas are a way to separate the object namespace, it seems more
> sensible to me to propagate the user of reasonable search paths than the
> use of hundreds (thousands?) of synonyms.
>
synonyms are easier to handle for an application - adding the search
path to an existing application can be too intrusive and error prone.
hans
--
Cybertec Geschwinde & Schönig GmbH
Schöngrabern 134; A-2020 Hollabrunn
Tel: +43/1/205 10 35 / 340
www.postgresql.at, www.cybertec.at
