Dmitry Yemanov wrote:

>"Arno Brinkman" <firebird@...> wrote:
>
>
>>Adding RDB$SCHEMA_NAME (to stay consistent) to RDB$RELATIONS
>>Adding something like
>>RDB$SCHEMAS (
>> RDB$SCHEMA_NAME VARCHAR(xx) NOT NULL PRIMARY KEY,
>> CREATOR VARCHAR(31) DEFAULT CURRENT_USER
>>)
>>
>>
>
>Do we speak about fixed-level (two-level as in Oracle or three-level as in
>the SQL spec) or multi-level namespaces? If the latter (which I consider
>more flexible), then RDB$SCHEMA should represent a tree. And all system
>metadata should reference it via some artificial key instead of the schema
>name.
>
>
>
>

A fully qualified name is <catalog>.<schema>.<object name>. We need to
reserve the catalog name for when we implement multiple database
statements. If I remember correctly, QLI already has support for this,
but it would be nice to push it deeper into the architecture.


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]