![]() | |
![]() |
| | Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
| |||
| |||
|
#2
| |||
| |||
|
|
I've been approached by the development people about removing the 'public' schema. They complain about having to manually remove the 'public_' tag from table names generated by their development software whenever they link to PG via ODBC. Renaming or using another schema is not what they're after either. |
#3
| |||
| |||
|
|
"Henry Combrinck" <henry (AT) metroweb (DOT) co.za> writes: I've been approached by the development people about removing the 'public' schema. They complain about having to manually remove the 'public_' tag from table names generated by their development software whenever they link to PG via ODBC. It sounds to me like the real problem is with non-schema-aware client software. I think your options are to fix that, or downgrade to a non-schema-aware database (eg. Postgres 7.2 or before). |
#4
| |||
| |||
|
|
It sounds to me like the real problem is with non-schema-aware client software. |
|
...I think your options are to fix that, or downgrade to a non-schema-aware database (eg. Postgres 7.2 or before). |
#5
| |||
| |||
|
|
It sounds to me like the real problem is with non-schema-aware client software. They're using Office XP Developer (Access 2000). No hope of fixing that. |
#6
| |||
| |||
|
|
It sounds to me like the real problem is with non-schema-aware client software. They're using Office XP Developer (Access 2000). No hope of fixing that. |
#7
| |||
| |||
|
|
It sounds to me like the real problem is with non-schema-aware client software. They're using Office XP Developer (Access 2000). No hope of fixing that. |
#8
| |||
| |||
|
|
No problem at all. It's easy to automate the table linking process. I have a table in access that holds - among other things - the internal and external name of my linked tables, in which database, schema and server they locate. [snip] |
![]() |
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
| |