On Thu, Jul 16, 2020 at 11:58 AM Laurenz Albe <laurenz.a...@cybertec.at> wrote:
> On Tue, 2020-07-14 at 21:33 +0000, PG Doc comments form wrote: > > this sentence looks strange: > > "Schemas are a purely logical structure and who can access what is > managed > > by the privilege system" > > https://www.postgresql.org/docs/12/manage-ag-overview.html > > > > especially this part: "who can access what is managed by" > > It is correct English, but maybe it could be worded better: > Agreed > "Schemas are a purely logical structure and impose no access restrictions, > apart from those defined by the privilege system." But I don't think this is an improvement. I think "modular" is a better term than "logical" here. Given that we've already said "multiple databases, which are isolated from each other" trying to say the same thing with "impose no access restrictions" doesn't seem to help; and one of the two major benefits of schemas is to provide privilege system hook less granular than object - which the original puts forward directly but clumsily and the proposal sets into an aside ("apart from"). The other benefit, namespace isolation, isn't even mentioned but seems like a useful addition. Thus: Schemas provide modular structure, with namespace isolation and authorization control. or ... possibly into separate schemas; which provide modular structure with namespace isolation and authorization control. David J.
