> -----Original Message-----
> From: Fernando Nasser
>
> Hiroshi Inoue wrote:
> >
> > > 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.
> >
>
> As most things in the SQL standard, you have to collect information
> from several places and add it together.
>
> Look at 4.20, 11.1 and specially at the rules for
> <schema qualified name>.
OK I can see at 4.20.
If a reference to a <table name> does not explicitly contain a <schema
name>,
then a specific <schema name> is implied. The particular <schema name>
associated with such a <table name> depends on the context in which the
<table name> appears and is governed by the rules for <schema qualified
name>.
Unfortunately I can't find what to see at 11.1. Please tell me where to see.
However I can see the following at 5.4 Names and Identifiers
11) If a <schema qualified name> does not contain a <schema name>, then
Case:
a) If the <schema qualified name> is contained in a <schema
definition>,
then the <schema name> that is specified or implicit in the <schema
definition>
is implicit.
b) Otherwise, the <schema name> that is specified or implicit for the
<SQL-client module definition> is implicit.
regards,
Hiroshi Inoue
---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 6: Have you searched our list archives?
http://archives.postgresql.org
