Hi, > Well, I at nights I dream about jooq having two operation modes: "fully > qualified schemata objects naming" and "short schemata objects naming".
You should go on vacation if you start dreaming about jOOQ! > Short mode is also useful for debugging because SQL queries (having all > schema names omitted) become more readable. And the ability to switch to > full mode in production is simply miraculous. I think this can be sufficiently covered today by using the SchemaMapping with a mapping of your schema to (Schema) null. Have you tried that? It's not officially documented or tested, but it might work. > For example, we have some logging in database in the table "log". And we > want this logging to be transparent. And we want customizable log rotation. > In this case we can setup table mapping so that the most recent table is > always referred to as "log" being actually named "log_2011-05-25" or > "log_2011-05" depending on rotation settings and others are invisible from > jooq. That makes sense. Of course, these specific things can always be implemented with writable views, as well. > This is as I understand, table-by-table mapping. Can you provide an example > of prefix mapping? I didn't catch it. I remember from my LAMP-times (early days), that some PHP products ship with a database whose tables should be prefixed, as you cannot always rely on having a dedicated database per product. In order to prevent naming clashes between several products installed on the same database (two products both having a "users" table, for instance), you can prefix a product's tables with "prod_a" and "prod_b", such that you will have "prod_a_users" and "prod_b_users" tables. But that's in fact the same issue as your logging example. I have added this feature request: https://sourceforge.net/apps/trac/jooq/ticket/551
