Thread: Name spacing functions and stored procedures
What do you guys do to namespace your functions so that they are not jumbled in with the system functions and also somewhat hierarchically organized.
Obviously it's possible to create schemas for different namespaces but that can lead to a lot of schemas which hold no data. The other way is to simply name your functions like _lib_etl_csv_import_weird_data_format but that's not too much fun either.Just curious how other people deal with the issue.
I don't understand. What is wrong with having a schema which holds no data? Schemas are cheap.
From: "Tim Uckun" <timuckun@gmail.com>
To: "pgsql-general" <pgsql-general@postgresql.org>
Sent: Wednesday, March 18, 2015 6:56:55 PM
Subject: [GENERAL] Name spacing functions and stored procedures
To: "pgsql-general" <pgsql-general@postgresql.org>
Sent: Wednesday, March 18, 2015 6:56:55 PM
Subject: [GENERAL] Name spacing functions and stored procedures
What do you guys do to namespace your functions so that they are not jumbled in with the system functions and also somewhat hierarchically organized.
Obviously it's possible to create schemas for different namespaces but that can lead to a lot of schemas which hold no data. The other way is to simply name your functions like _lib_etl_csv_import_weird_data_format but that's not too much fun either.Just curious how other people deal with the issue.
On Wednesday, March 18, 2015, WadeDare4703 <wadedare4703@comcast.net> wrote:
I think you can do the naming but tooling support is non-existent and, if it's not readily provided in core and used by psql or pgadmin it's unlikely other tools would want to write their own.
I don't understand. What is wrong with having a schema which holds no data? Schemas are cheap.From: "Tim Uckun" <timuckun@gmail.com>
To: "pgsql-general" <pgsql-general@postgresql.org>
Sent: Wednesday, March 18, 2015 6:56:55 PM
Subject: [GENERAL] Name spacing functions and stored proceduresWhat do you guys do to namespace your functions so that they are not jumbled in with the system functions and also somewhat hierarchically organized.Obviously it's possible to create schemas for different namespaces but that can lead to a lot of schemas which hold no data. The other way is to simply name your functions like _lib_etl_csv_import_weird_data_format but that's not too much fun either.Just curious how other people deal with the issue.
Create an extension?
Barring that a dedicated schema without user data has desirable properties whether you manage it manually or via an extension. The former ways allows you to write a migration script using drop schema and install everything from scratch. While not useable in all cases it can be done.
I do wish schemas had some additional properties, like being able to readily specify (if not enforce) private versus public functions, for visibility during schema browsing, or creating a hierarchy which too would be visible in browsing. This is what I think you are wishing for as well. Something like Java packages.
David J.
Hi
2015-03-19 2:56 GMT+01:00 Tim Uckun <timuckun@gmail.com>:
What do you guys do to namespace your functions so that they are not jumbled in with the system functions and also somewhat hierarchically organized.Obviously it's possible to create schemas for different namespaces but that can lead to a lot of schemas which hold no data. The other way is to simply name your functions like _lib_etl_csv_import_weird_data_format but that's not too much fun either.
What is problem with schemas? It is tool for logical database structuring - for tables, for functions.
I use schemas without any problems.
Just curious how other people deal with the issue.
I guess I see schemas as ways to group data not functions.
It would be very nice to be able to group your code into proper modules though. It's something I really miss.
Tim Uckun schrieb am 19.03.2015 um 11:03: > I guess I see schemas as ways to group data not functions. A schema is just a namespace. The only "link" between data and a schema is that data can only live in tables and a table is associated with a namespace. Even if you use it to "group data", you actually use to group "objects that hold data". > It would be very nice to be able to group your code into proper modules though. It's something I really miss. An extension can be seen as a module that lives in a dedicated namespace: the schema.
2015-03-19 11:03 GMT+01:00 Tim Uckun <timuckun@gmail.com>:
I guess I see schemas as ways to group data not functions.It would be very nice to be able to group your code into proper modules though. It's something I really miss.
what is advantage modules?
2015-03-19 11:46 GMT+01:00 Pavel Stehule <pavel.stehule@gmail.com>:
2015-03-19 11:03 GMT+01:00 Tim Uckun <timuckun@gmail.com>:I guess I see schemas as ways to group data not functions.It would be very nice to be able to group your code into proper modules though. It's something I really miss.what is advantage modules?
It is terrible hard to implement Oracle PL/SQL modules in Postgres due support more than one language.
Pavel
I’ve always used schemas – usually one for each of the business processes.
From: pgsql-general-owner@postgresql.org [mailto:pgsql-general-owner@postgresql.org] On Behalf Of Pavel Stehule
Sent: Thursday, March 19, 2015 12:38 AM
To: Tim Uckun
Cc: pgsql-general
Subject: Re: [GENERAL] Name spacing functions and stored procedures
Hi
2015-03-19 2:56 GMT+01:00 Tim Uckun <timuckun@gmail.com>:
What do you guys do to namespace your functions so that they are not jumbled in with the system functions and also somewhat hierarchically organized.
Obviously it's possible to create schemas for different namespaces but that can lead to a lot of schemas which hold no data. The other way is to simply name your functions like _lib_etl_csv_import_weird_data_format but that's not too much fun either.
What is problem with schemas? It is tool for logical database structuring - for tables, for functions.
I use schemas without any problems.
Just curious how other people deal with the issue.
NOTICE: This email message is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s) and may contain confidential and privileged information. Any unauthorized use, disclosure or distribution is prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender by reply email and destroy all copies of the original message.