On Apr 19, 2006, at 20:31 , chris smith wrote:
> On 4/19/06, Kynn Jones <kynnjo@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> I keep bumping against this situation: I have a main database A,
>> and I want
>> to implement a database B, that is distinct from A, but
>> subordinate to it,
>> meaning that it refers to data in A, but not vice versa.
>>
>> I don't simply want to add new tables to A to implement B, because
>> this
>> unnecessarily clutters A's schema with tables that entirely
>> extraneous to
>> it.
How about putting B's tables in a separate schema in the same
database as A?
Michael Glaesemann
grzm myrealbox com
