> Shridhar Daithankar dijo: 
> 
> > On 4 Sep 2002 at 3:24, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> > 
> > > OK, the HISTORY file is updated, and 7.3 is branded and ready for beta1.
> > 
> > Some minor stuff,
> 
> In the schema changes description:
> 
> "Schemas allow users to create objects in their own namespace
> so two people can have the same table with the same name."

> Shouldn't it read "so two people can have tables with the same name"
> ?  My point is that the tables are not the same, they just have the
> same name.

How about this for a wording:

 "Schemas allow users or applications to have their own namespaces in
 which to create objects.  

 A typical application of this is to allow creation of tables that
 _appear_ to have the same name.  For instance, if some GNOME
 applications were using PostgreSQL to store their configuration, a
 "GNUMERIC" namespace might have a table PREFERENCES to store
 preferences for that application, while a "POWERSHELL" namespace
 would allow _that_ application to store configuration in a
 PREFERENCES table that is quite distinct from the "GNUMERIC" one.

 The "true" table names may be GNUMERIC.PREFERENCES and
 POWERSHELL.PREFERENCES, but by using Schemas, applications do not
 need to be speckled with gratuitious added prefixes of GNUMERIC or
 POWERSHELL."

Note that I'm pointing at "applications" as the primary purpose for
this, as opposed to "users."

In the long run, are not applications more likely to be the driving
force encouraging the use of schemas?
--
(reverse (concatenate 'string "gro.gultn@" "enworbbc"))
http://www3.sympatico.ca/cbbrowne/unix.html
"The   most  precisely-explained   and   voluminously-documented  user
interface "rule" can and will  be shot to pieces with the introduction
of a single new priority consideration." -- Michael Peck





Wed, 04 Sep 2002 12:15:28 -0400
cbbrowne@cbbrowne.com
Re: HISTORY updated, 7.3 branded 

OK, wording updated to add 'applications':

           Schemas allow users to create objects in their own namespace
           so two people or applications can have tables with the same
           name. There is also a public schema for shared tables.
           Table/index creation can be restricted by removing
           permissions on the public schema.


---------------------------------------------------------------------------

cbbrowne@cbbrowne.com wrote:
> > Shridhar Daithankar dijo: 
> > 
> > > On 4 Sep 2002 at 3:24, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> > > 
> > > > OK, the HISTORY file is updated, and 7.3 is branded and ready for beta1.
> > > 
> > > Some minor stuff,
> > 
> > In the schema changes description:
> > 
> > "Schemas allow users to create objects in their own namespace
> > so two people can have the same table with the same name."
> 
> > Shouldn't it read "so two people can have tables with the same name"
> > ?  My point is that the tables are not the same, they just have the
> > same name.
> 
> How about this for a wording:
> 
>  "Schemas allow users or applications to have their own namespaces in
>  which to create objects.  
> 
>  A typical application of this is to allow creation of tables that
>  _appear_ to have the same name.  For instance, if some GNOME
>  applications were using PostgreSQL to store their configuration, a
>  "GNUMERIC" namespace might have a table PREFERENCES to store
>  preferences for that application, while a "POWERSHELL" namespace
>  would allow _that_ application to store configuration in a
>  PREFERENCES table that is quite distinct from the "GNUMERIC" one.
> 
>  The "true" table names may be GNUMERIC.PREFERENCES and
>  POWERSHELL.PREFERENCES, but by using Schemas, applications do not
>  need to be speckled with gratuitious added prefixes of GNUMERIC or
>  POWERSHELL."
> 
> Note that I'm pointing at "applications" as the primary purpose for
> this, as opposed to "users."
> 
> In the long run, are not applications more likely to be the driving
> force encouraging the use of schemas?
> --
> (reverse (concatenate 'string "gro.gultn@" "enworbbc"))
> http://www3.sympatico.ca/cbbrowne/unix.html
> "The   most  precisely-explained   and   voluminously-documented  user
> interface "rule" can and will  be shot to pieces with the introduction
> of a single new priority consideration." -- Michael Peck
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
> TIP 3: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate
> subscribe-nomail command to majordomo@postgresql.org so that your
> message can get through to the mailing list cleanly
> 

-- 
  Bruce Momjian                        |  http://candle.pha.pa.us
  pgman@candle.pha.pa.us               |  (610) 359-1001
  +  If your life is a hard drive,     |  13 Roberts Road
  +  Christ can be your backup.        |  Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073

Wed, 4 Sep 2002 13:02:44 -0400 (EDT)
Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us>
Re: HISTORY updated, 7.3 branded