Just to be clear, the problem is not having duplicate table names in different schemas, it is using multiple schemas at all. The the case that Matt and I are describing, we don't have any duplicate table names, we just have multiple schemas that need to be used together in the same queries.
I've heard two approaches to adding schema names for tables in the reactor config files. The first is to add an owner which would look like: object name=mytable owner=tigger /
The second is to allow fully qualified table names which would look like: object name=tigger.mytable /
I tend towards a
On Wednesday 30 August 2006 12:15, Beth Bowden wrote:
The second is to allow fully qualified table names which would look like:
object name=tigger.mytable /
Is there any reason to bother with an owner field if the name property can
have as many dots as needed ?
--
Tom Chiverton
: [Reactor for CF] adding schema names
On Wednesday 30 August 2006 12:15, Beth Bowden wrote:
The second is to allow fully qualified table names which would look
like:
object name=tigger.mytable /
Is there any reason to bother with an owner field if the name property
can
have as many dots
Are you suggesting inclusion of the schema name as a per ReactorFactor attribute or as a Reactor Object attribute?As far as I know, in our configuration at work, we really only use one schema. Thus adding it to each Reactor XML object configuration is redundant.
Of course, the use cases
] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Beth Bowden
Sent: Wednesday, August 30, 2006
7:16 AM
To: reactor@doughughes.net
Subject: [Reactor for CF] adding
schema names
I've heard two approaches to adding schema names for tables in the
reactor config files. The first is to add an owner which would look
On Wednesday 30 August 2006 13:56, Dan Wilson wrote:
Of course, the use cases vary
I *think* the case is that most of the tables live in the configured schema,
but the odd one or two are exposed from another schema.
So you might
select foo from bar;
and
select baz from boo;
but also
select
On 8/30/06, Van Daele Wouter (DBB) [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Since this is (can/could be) an essential part of the configuration, I
would prefer it to be as explicit as possible. If I remember correctly,
there was a question about adding a server name too... You might put
everything in a single
, 2006 9:24 AM
To: reactor@doughughes.net
Subject: Re: [Reactor for CF] adding schema names
On Wednesday 30 August 2006 13:56, Dan Wilson wrote:
Of course, the use cases vary
I *think* the case is that most of the tables live in the configured schema,
but the odd one or two are exposed from
9:24 AM
To: reactor@doughughes.net
Subject: Re: [Reactor for CF] adding schema names
On Wednesday 30 August 2006 13:56, Dan Wilson wrote:
Of course, the use cases vary
I *think* the case is that most of the tables live in the configured schema,
but the odd one or two are exposed from
10 matches
Mail list logo
