That is correct. But table old will NOT be converted to new because only the schema name is converted. And table "old" WILL exist because it will also be copied.
I have tested and it works properly. Please do not provide hypothetical examples. Give me an actual working example that causes the problem. On Tue, Sep 15, 2015 at 9:39 AM, Igor Neyman <iney...@perceptron.com> wrote: > I still do not see any problem. The whole purpose of the function is to > copy ALL sequences , tables and functions to "new" schema, so new.old WILL > exist. > > > I don't see how you can possibly write a function that references a schema > that does not yet exist! > > Again, please provide a _working_ example of what you think the problem is. > > > > Melvin, > > > > This statement: > > > > SELECT old.field FROM old.old; > > > > selects column “field” from table “old” which is in schema “old”. > > > > Your script converts it into: > > > > SELECT new.field FROM new.old > > > > which will try to select column “field” from table “new” in schema “new”. > > The obvious problem is that there is no table “new” in schema “new”, the > table will still be called “old”. > > > > Jim’s example is very similar to what I provided a few days ago. > > > > Regards, > > Igor Neyman > > > -- *Melvin Davidson* I reserve the right to fantasize. Whether or not you wish to share my fantasy is entirely up to you.
