> -----Original Message-----
> From: Fernando Nasser
>
> Hiroshi Inoue wrote:
> >
> > > We can't do that. Accordingly to the SQL if you are user HIROSHI
> > > and write "SELECT * FROM a;" the table is actually "HIROSHI.a".
> > >
> > > This must work for people who are using SQL-schemas in their databases
> > > or we would have a non-conforming implementation of SCHEMAS
> (would make
> > > the whole exercise pointless IMO).
> >
> > Schema name isn't necessarily a user id since SQL-92
> > though SQL-86 and SQL-89 had and probably Oracle still
> > has the limitation. As far as I see PostgreSQL's schema
> > support wouldn't have the limitation. Probably I wouldn't
> > create the schema HIROSHI using PostgreSQL. When
> > I used Oracle I really disliked the limitation.
> >
>
> You misunderstood what I've said. You may have how many schemas
> you please. But you will have to refer to their objects specifying
> the schema name explicitly. The only cases where you can omit the
> schema name are (accordingly to the SQL'99 standard):
Please tell me where's the description in SQL99 ?
I wasn't able to find it unfortunately.
regards,
Hiroshi Inoue
