SQL Schema vs Schema

Can you explain the technical distinction between a protocol and a scheme in a URL? As per a previous response, a scheme is not classified as a protocol. However, is this the only factor that distinguishes the two, or are there other factors that set them apart?


From my understanding, the symbol known as ”
word “schema
” appears to have two distinct applications.

  • The
    structure of the database
    comprises the schema, encompassing both the tables and their interconnections.
  • The schema is a namespace that enables the creation of virtual groupings of database objects.

The website dataedo.com offers an article that defines the term “database schema” and its various interpretations. However, the article fails to provide a justification for why these interpretations share the same name.

Is there a subtle yet intriguing connection between the various applications of this term, such that one definition seamlessly transitions into another?


The official reason behind why the word “schema” was chosen to describe
concrete object
can only be given by the developer who originally implemented it. However, I could hypothesize that the choice was based on the fact that a schema is a collection of related entities that form the structure of a subject matter. This subject matter could potentially be a standalone database if designed that way, and without schemas, unrelated entities would be mixed within the same database.

When considering the initial definition, it is possible to conceptualize a schema in an abstract manner. However, it seems that the intention was to create a tangible entity to effectively manage a database that contains multiple structures which may not have a direct relationship.

Frequently Asked Questions