On Apr 19, 2006, at 20:31 , chris smith wrote:
On 4/19/06, Kynn Jones <kynnjo@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
I keep bumping against this situation: I have a main database A,
and I want
to implement a database B, that is distinct from A, but
subordinate to it,
meaning that it refers to data in A, but not vice versa.
I don't simply want to add new tables to A to implement B, because
this
unnecessarily clutters A's schema with tables that entirely
extraneous to
it.
How about putting B's tables in a separate schema in the same
database as A?
Michael Glaesemann
grzm myrealbox com
