31.10.2013 14:45, Robbert-Jan wrote:
> The new fields rdb$generator_name and rdb$identity_type are now defined in
> rdb$relation_fields.
> I think it would be more consistent if they were stored in rdb$fields (like 
> eg.
> rdb$computed_source).
> rdb$relation_fields should only be used for properties that can be overriden 
> on field
> level from a domain definition, like default value (rdb$default_source) or 
> not null
> (rdb$null_flag).
> But for rdb$generator_name and rdb$identity_type this is not the case, like 
> it is not the
> case for computed by (rdb$computed_source).
> Do you agree?

   No. Two different columns based on the same domain must not share the same 
sequence, so 
rdb$generator_name definitely does not belong to rdb$fields.

-- 
   WBR, SD.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Android is increasing in popularity, but the open development platform that
developers love is also attractive to malware creators. Download this white
paper to learn more about secure code signing practices that can help keep
Android apps secure.
http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=65839951&iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk
Firebird-Devel mailing list, web interface at 
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/firebird-devel

Reply via email to