Re: [gnome-db] Oracle, Table Names and Progress

[Rodrigo Moya <rodrigo gnome-db org>]

On Sun, 2003-02-02 at 01:42, Steve Fosdick wrote:
> On 01 Feb 2003 17:39:49 +0100
> Rodrigo Moya <rodrigo gnome-db org> wrote:
> 
> > On Sat, 2003-02-01 at 02:16, Steve Fosdick wrote:
> > > 
> > > Is this what the SCHEMA_DATABASES category is supposed to do - offer
> > > different sets of tables/views which are available without changing
> > > the connection to the server (including who we are logged in as)?
> > >
> > exactly. Usually, those would be real databases, as it is for postgres
> > and mysql, for instance. I was thinking that the oracle provider could
> > simulate databases by using Oracle's schemas.
> 
> When you mentioned postgres namespaces it ocuured to be that this may be
> closer in concept to what we need to do with Oracle than using the
> SCHEMA_DATABASES category.
> 
> I have looked at the postgres documentation for version 7.3 and my view
> was still further confirmed - the documentation seems to call these
> namesspaces schemas and these seem to map to oracle schemas (users) very
> well, perhaps because they seem to be part of the SQL92 standard.
> 
> I have also looked at the implementation within the postgres provider
> intending to use it as an example and I am not sure it is quite correct
> for either postgres or oracle but rather than jump to conclusions I would
> like to be sure.  I don't have postgres 7.3 installed (mine is 7.2.1) so
> could someone who has please run the query below and send me the output?
> 
> SELECT c.relname, u.usename, pg_catalog.obj_description(c.oid), NULL
> FROM pg_catalog.pg_class c, pg_catalog.pg_user u, pg_catalog.pg_namespace n
> WHERE u.usesysid=c.relowner AND c.relkind = 'r' AND c.relnamespace=n.oid
> AND pg_catalog.pg_table_is_visible (c.oid)
> ORDER BY relname
> 
find it attached.

> [If you know the query from the where it appears in the postgres
> provider I have deliberately missed out the 'AND n.nspname NOT IN
> ('pg_catalog', 'pg_toast')' phrase to guarantee that we get tables from
> at least two namespaces.]
> 
> > hmm, right. Or we could just leave them unimplemented in oracle,
> > although well, that would be a strange thing to have to call a
> > (future) drop_user for a schema returned in the DATABASES schema. Not
> > sure what to do, any other idea?
> 
> That would seems strange which is one reason I think namesspaces may be
> a better way to go.
> 
sounds good, if that's what you came up to.

cheers

"pg_aggregate"	"postgres"	"NULL"	"NULL"
"pg_am"	"postgres"	"NULL"	"NULL"
"pg_amop"	"postgres"	"NULL"	"NULL"
"pg_amproc"	"postgres"	"NULL"	"NULL"
"pg_attrdef"	"postgres"	"NULL"	"NULL"
"pg_attribute"	"postgres"	"NULL"	"NULL"
"pg_cast"	"postgres"	"NULL"	"NULL"
"pg_class"	"postgres"	"NULL"	"NULL"
"pg_constraint"	"postgres"	"NULL"	"NULL"
"pg_conversion"	"postgres"	"NULL"	"NULL"
"pg_database"	"postgres"	"NULL"	"NULL"
"pg_depend"	"postgres"	"NULL"	"NULL"
"pg_description"	"postgres"	"NULL"	"NULL"
"pg_group"	"postgres"	"NULL"	"NULL"
"pg_index"	"postgres"	"NULL"	"NULL"
"pg_inherits"	"postgres"	"NULL"	"NULL"
"pg_language"	"postgres"	"NULL"	"NULL"
"pg_largeobject"	"postgres"	"NULL"	"NULL"
"pg_listener"	"postgres"	"NULL"	"NULL"
"pg_namespace"	"postgres"	"NULL"	"NULL"
"pg_opclass"	"postgres"	"NULL"	"NULL"
"pg_operator"	"postgres"	"NULL"	"NULL"
"pg_proc"	"postgres"	"NULL"	"NULL"
"pg_rewrite"	"postgres"	"NULL"	"NULL"
"pg_shadow"	"postgres"	"NULL"	"NULL"
"pg_statistic"	"postgres"	"NULL"	"NULL"
"pg_trigger"	"postgres"	"NULL"	"NULL"
"pg_type"	"postgres"	"NULL"	"NULL"
"status_reports"	"rodrigo"	"NULL"	"NULL"