I was always interested in one relevant (for me), but not existing function of all the relational databases that I worked with: the impossibility of namespace tables.
in MySQL, for example, you can fully qualify a table with a database name, for example dbname.tablename, with a database acting as a "prefix" or "namespace". However, this function stops here, and you are not very far from it. Namespace support will provide you with the ability to have type syntax dbname.namespace.table. You can group related tables into different namespaces, for example (for a blog)
db.userdata.logininfo
db.userdata.preferences
db.postdata.content
db.postdata.acls
or
db.blog.whatever
db.wiki.whatever
db.common.auth
This would allow us to remain in the same database (using all the advantages of such a setting) and at the same time provide a more flexible and self-documenting environment. However, most of the time I found that underlining the table name is used for this purpose as an obvious workaround.
My questions are: are there DBMSs with such a function (possibly with a different name)? Is this considered not important enough in database design practice to get support?
source
share