How about a client requesting a schema that the server cannot provide? I would expect the following behaviour: request available (yes/no) response schema a yes schema a schema a no default schema not specified not applicable default schema Theo >>> [log in to unmask] 10-07-02 16:57 >>> But (a) is not amenable to explain. It says that the behavior is unpredictable, learn to like it. I don't. Ralph > -----Original Message----- > From: Ray Denenberg [mailto:[log in to unmask]] > Sent: Wednesday, July 10, 2002 10:46 AM > To: [log in to unmask] > Subject: multiple schemas > > > "LeVan,Ralph" wrote: > > > I'm unhappy with the opinion that not specifying a schema > might result in > > records from multiple schemas being returned. Servers > should be expected to > > specify their default schema (through explain) and return > all records in > > that schema when an explicit schema has not been specified. > > What are the semantics of omitting the schema name in a > request? Is it: > > (a) give me each record in whatever schema is available (or > the best, if there > is more than one), or; > (b) I don't know what's the default schema but give me all > records in that > schema; or > (c) I know what your default schema is; I'm omitting it > because I'm lazy. But I > want all the records in that schema. > > If it's (c) then you're right. (b) doesn't make sense -- it > assumes that the > client is prepared for multiple schemas so why limit it to > one. If it's (a) > then I dissagree. > > --Ray >