Re: Are Oracle 'schemas' like SQL Server 'databases'?

Yes, I'm well aware of that,but the poster explicitly stated he rather didn't want to do that, and hardcoding table owners is a pain if you have production and test schemas, or a production database where they took a different schema owner.
My answer is not incorrect and your comment is unfair and exaggerated.

Regards,

Sybrand Bakker, Oracle DBA

On Tue, 19 Oct 1999 19:20:34 GMT, private_comm_at_my-deja.com wrote:

>In article <940235094.20064.0.pluto.d4ee154e_at_news.demon.nl>,
> "Sybrand Bakker" <postmaster_at_sybrandb.nospam.demon.nl> wrote:
>> Answers embedded
>>
>> Hth
>>
>> --
>> Sybrand Bakker, Oracle DBA
>> Stephen <smcgerty_at_my-deja.com> wrote in message
>> news:7ueg9p$1ol$1_at_nnrp1.deja.com...
>> > Hi,
>> >
>> > I have a fairly general question about Oracle, as I'm relatively
>new to
>> > the product:
>> >
>> > What is the equivalent in Oracle of a SQL Server 'database' (ie, a
>> > group of tables, views, SPs etc. all put together, and independent
>of
>> > the tables and views of any other 'database')?
>> >
>>
>> a schema
>>
>> > I'm working on a small application and I need to create a few
>tables,
>> > but I don't want to interfere with the tables of any other
>applications
>> > that are on the Oracle Server.
>> >
>> > The documentation mentions 'schemas', but there seems to be a one to
>> > one relationship between 'users' and 'schemas'. Is it common
>practice
>> > to create a user of the same name as the application (eg 'PAYROLL')
>and
>> > then create each of the application's tables under that account (eg
>> > 'PAYROLL.EMPLOYEE', 'PAYROLL.TAXRATES')?
>> >
>>
>> yes
>>
>> > What if one 'human' user wishes to have access to two of the
>> > applications? Do applications get written with constant references
>to
>> > the full table name (eg 'PAYROLL.EMPLOYEE'), or do they 'set'
>> > themselves to point to the 'PAYROLL' schema and then work from
>there?
>> >
>>
>> No, you need to grant privileges to the human user, and then you need
>to set
>> up either public synonyms (so anyone with privilege can refer to that
>> object) or private synonyms (in this case you need to set up synonyms
>per
>> users, but this has the advantage you can work with a production and
>a test
>> schema)
>>
>> > I'm pretty sure I'm missing the overall picture here, so any
>comments
>> > would be appreciated.
>> >
>> > Regards,
>> > Stephen
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
>> > Before you buy.
>>
>>
>
>Your last point is incorrect in that you can reference tables in other
>schemas as schemas.table as long as you have preveliges. Of course the
>sensible way is to use synoymns.
>
>PC
>
>
>Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
>Before you buy.
Received on Tue Oct 19 1999 - 14:57:51 CDT