Fernando Nasser wrote: > > Hiroshi Inoue wrote: > > > > Fernando Nasser wrote: > > > > > > 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>. > > > > > > Then think a little bit about scenarios, trying to apply the rules. > > > > > > It is a pain, but there is no other way. > > > > I couldn't find the description CURRENT_SCHEMA == CURRENT_USER. > > If I recognize SQL99 correctly, the CURRENT schema is the schema > > defined in a <SQL-client module> not restricted to the CURRENT > > user. > > > > Yes,
OK I wasn't wrong at this point. > but we don't have a "module" language. You have to look for > "session". Do you mean PostgreSQL by the *we* ? We have never been and would never be completely in conformity to standard. If we don't have a "module" language, does it mean we couldn't have any subsitute for <SQL-client module> ? regards, Hiroshi Inoue ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 4: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster