On Wed, 8 Mar 2006, [ISO-8859-1] Hans-Jürgen Schönig wrote: > Stephan Szabo wrote: > > On Tue, 7 Mar 2006, Jonah H. Harris wrote: > > > > > >>On 3/7/06, Stephan Szabo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> > >>>I'd personally be more interested in what the impact is on people not > >>>using synonyms. How free is any search for synonyms if you aren't using > >>>the feature? > >> > >> > >>Unless synonym enablement were a configurable parameter (which wouldn't > >>really make sense), the cost would be the same whether they're used or not > >>during searching. > > > > > > Right, but the response was that "using" synonyms incurred a cost and this > > should be documented. However, if there's a cost to people not using > > synonyms there's a higher barrier to entry for the feature. > > > > > the costs will only be added if the "real table" is not found. > therefore there is no impact on "normal" users.
Doesn't that pretty much go against the (I thought) outstanding behavioral question of whether the synonyms are scoped and obey search path? If they do, I don't see how the above rule can hold since finding the "real table" is insufficient to know if there's an earlier synonym. ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 3: Have you checked our extensive FAQ? http://www.postgresql.org/docs/faq