+1 for public
> On May 29, 2017, at 8:31 AM, Alexey Kuznetsov <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> +1 for public
> it make sense when copy-pasting SQL queries from ignite to H2 in order to
> check how sql works.
>
> On Mon, May 29, 2017 at 9:21 PM, Pavel Tupitsyn <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
>> If "public" is already in H2, then it makes sense to use it.
>>
>> On Mon, May 29, 2017 at 5:18 PM, Sergey Kozlov <[email protected]>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> I vote for "public". I assume we may need "ignite" word for future as
>>> reserved word for SQL syntax extensions ...
>>>
>>> On Mon, May 29, 2017 at 5:14 PM, Taras Ledkov <[email protected]>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> I'm OK with 'public'.
>>>>
>>>> Does the "default schema" mean (for Ignite) that all object are
>> contained
>>>> in the schema is available without a schema specification?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On 29.05.2017 16:54, Vladimir Ozerov wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Folks,
>>>>>
>>>>> I am going to introduce predefined SQL schema which is always
>> accessible
>>>>> on
>>>>> all Ignite nodes [1]. Now I am thinking on how to name. Ideas are
>>>>> welcomed.
>>>>>
>>>>> My 50 cents:
>>>>> 1) "public" - Postgres use this name
>>>>> 2) "mydb" - MySQL use this name
>>>>> 3) "ignite" - to be aligned with our product name
>>>>> 4) "default" - not the way to go, since "DEFAULT" is reserved SQL
>>> keyword.
>>>>>
>>>>> Personally I prefer "public".
>>>>>
>>>>> Any other thoughts?
>>>>>
>>>>> Vladimir.
>>>>>
>>>>> [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-5320
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Taras Ledkov
>>>> Mail-To: [email protected]
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Sergey Kozlov
>>> GridGain Systems
>>> www.gridgain.com
>>>
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Alexey Kuznetsov
