On 19 Oct 2001, Gunnar [iso-8859-1] R�nning wrote:
> * Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
> |
> | Yeah. I am wondering whether we couldn't support Oracle-style packages
> | as a thin layer of syntactic sugar on top of schemas. I am concerned
> | about the prospect that "foo.bar" might mean either "object bar in
> | schema foo" or "object bar in package foo".
>
> Agreed, and in Sybase you may declare a procedure in a schema(or
> database which is the Sybase term). If you want it global you declare it
> in the "master" schema.
Oh cool. I knew that Oracle used "standard" for the name of the built-in
package, but I didn't know a name for the built-in schema. "master" sounds
good.
Take care,
Bill
