On 19 Oct 2001, Gunnar [iso-8859-1] Rønning wrote: > * Tom Lane <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 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 ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 4: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster
