{"action":"created","issue":{"url":"https://api.github.com/repos/robconery/massive-js/issues/30","labels_url":"https://api.github.com/repos/robconery/massive-js/issues/30/labels{/name}","comments_url":"https://api.github.com/repos/robconery/massive-js/issues/30/comments","events_url":"https://api.github.com/repos/robconery/massive-js/issues/30/events","html_url":"https://github.com/robconery/massive-js/issues/30","id":60245969,"number":30,"title":"Account for schemas in loadTables","user":{"login":"robconery","id":78586,"avatar_url":"https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/u/78586?v=3","gravatar_id":"","url":"https://api.github.com/users/robconery","html_url":"https://github.com/robconery","followers_url":"https://api.github.com/users/robconery/followers","following_url":"https://api.github.com/users/robconery/following{/other_user}","gists_url":"https://api.github.com/users/robconery/gists{/gist_id}","starred_url":"https://api.github.com/users/robconery/starred{/owner}{/repo}","subscriptions_url":"https://api.github.com/users/robconery/subscriptions","organizations_url":"https://api.github.com/users/robconery/orgs","repos_url":"https://api.github.com/users/robconery/repos","events_url":"https://api.github.com/users/robconery/events{/privacy}","received_events_url":"https://api.github.com/users/robconery/received_events","type":"User","site_admin":false},"labels":[{"url":"https://api.github.com/repos/robconery/massive-js/labels/enhancement","name":"enhancement","color":"84b6eb"}],"state":"open","locked":false,"assignee":null,"milestone":null,"comments":2,"created_at":"2015-03-08T07:40:17Z","updated_at":"2015-03-08T15:54:56Z","closed_at":null,"body":"Right now we're just dropping things from `public` right on to the massive instance which works for many situations. I think it would be better to account for schemas as well - as that's [a good approach for keeping your DB uncluttered](http://www.postgresql.org/docs/9.4/static/ddl-schemas.html) when it gets to be rather large.\r\n\r\n> There are several reasons why one might want to use schemas:\r\n - To allow many users to use one database without interfering with each other.\r\n - To organize database objects into logical groups to make them more manageable.\r\n - Third-party applications can be put into separate schemas so they do not collide with the names of other objects.\r\n\r\n> Schemas are analogous to directories at the operating system level, except that schemas cannot be nested.\r\n\r\nOur current tableSql pulls the schema (I think) so we have access to it. If the schema is `public` I say we do what we've been doing (pop it onto the massive instance). If it's not, namespace thus:\r\n\r\n```javacript\r\ndb.my_schema.my_table.find()\r\n```\r\n"},"comment":{"url":"https://api.github.com/repos/robconery/massive-js/issues/comments/77757130","html_url":"https://github.com/robconery/massive-js/issues/30#issuecomment-77757130","issue_url":"https://api.github.com/repos/robconery/massive-js/issues/30","id":77757130,"user":{"login":"xivSolutions","id":853147,"avatar_url":"https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/u/853147?v=3","gravatar_id":"","url":"https://api.github.com/users/xivSolutions","html_url":"https://github.com/xivSolutions","followers_url":"https://api.github.com/users/xivSolutions/followers","following_url":"https://api.github.com/users/xivSolutions/following{/other_user}","gists_url":"https://api.github.com/users/xivSolutions/gists{/gist_id}","starred_url":"https://api.github.com/users/xivSolutions/starred{/owner}{/repo}","subscriptions_url":"https://api.github.com/users/xivSolutions/subscriptions","organizations_url":"https://api.github.com/users/xivSolutions/orgs","repos_url":"https://api.github.com/users/xivSolutions/repos","events_url":"https://api.github.com/users/xivSolutions/events{/privacy}","received_events_url":"https://api.github.com/users/xivSolutions/received_events","type":"User","site_admin":false},"created_at":"2015-03-08T15:54:56Z","updated_at":"2015-03-08T15:54:56Z","body":"Do we want this to be bi-directional? In other words, do we want to be able to push schemas into the back end in some fashion when creating tables, by simply bolting the namespace on (somehow)? Or do we want to discourage willy-nilly schema creation by forcing folks to do this explicitly (even if it is a discrete/explicit massive api call). "}}