On 03/26/13 08:53, Dmitry Yemanov wrote: > 26.03.2013 7:42, Dmitry Yemanov wrote: > >> This was an intended change which probably became an overkill. I will >> report back after closer investigation. > Sorry, I thought that your issue was caused by the i.RDB$RELATION_NAME = > rf.RDB$RELATION_NAME condition, but it's not. So there's only one error > and it's explained in my prior message. No bugs here, everything is as > designed. The query should be rewritten as: > > select > rf.RDB$RELATION_NAME, > rf.RDB$FIELD_NAME, > s.RDB$INDEX_NAME > from RDB$RELATION_FIELDS rf > left join ( > RDB$INDICES i > join RDB$INDEX_SEGMENTS s > on i.RDB$INDEX_NAME = s.RDB$INDEX_NAME > join RDB$RELATION_CONSTRAINTS rc > on rc.RDB$INDEX_NAME = s.RDB$INDEX_NAME > and rc.RDB$CONSTRAINT_TYPE = 'FOREIGN KEY' > ) on i.RDB$RELATION_NAME = rf.RDB$RELATION_NAME > and s.RDB$FIELD_NAME = rf.RDB$FIELD_NAME > where > rf.RDB$FIELD_SOURCE starting with 'D_FK_'
Dmirty, what do you think - will the users be happy to rewrite lots of SQL operators to match this restriction? ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Own the Future-Intel® Level Up Game Demo Contest 2013 Rise to greatness in Intel's independent game demo contest. Compete for recognition, cash, and the chance to get your game on Steam. $5K grand prize plus 10 genre and skill prizes. Submit your demo by 6/6/13. http://p.sf.net/sfu/intel_levelupd2d Firebird-Devel mailing list, web interface at https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/firebird-devel
