On 05 Oct 2004 11:46:18 +0200, Harald Fuchs wrote:
> "Martijn Tonies" writes:
>>
>> MS SQL, or Firebird, for example, store the view-source as defined -
>> this includes comments, spacing etc etc... In short: it becomes usuable.
>>
>> MySQL should do this too. From reading these lists, I think MySQL
>> only stores the resulting structure - or something similar - and
>> (currently) not the view source. To make views useful, better change
>> it... :-)
>
> Nope. A standards-compliant database is _required_ to store the
> structure of its objects in its internal information_schema
There is no data stored in the INFORMATION_SCHEMA at all:
<quote>
4.2 Introduction to the Information Schema.
The views of the Information Schema are viewed tables ....
</quote> ISO/IEC 9075-11:2003
> not some SQL string.
The VIEWS view in the INFORMATION_SCHEMA is derived from the VIEWS
base table in the DEFINITION_SCHEMA. Part of the definition of the
that reads:
<quote>
6.66 VIEWS base table
(..)
Definition
CREATE TABLE VIEWS (
TABLE_CATALOG INFORMATION_SCHEMA.SQL_IDENTIFIER,
TABLE_SCHEMA INFORMATION_SCHEMA.SQL_IDENTIFIER,
TABLE_NAME INFORMATION_SCHEMA.SQL_IDENTIFIER,
VIEW_DEFINITION INFORMATION_SCHEMA.CHARACTER_DATE,
</quote> ISO/IEC 9075-11:2003
So what would VIEW_DEFINITION store exactly if not "the query
expression that defines a view"?
Since the is no requirement to have an accessible DEFINITION_SCHEMA
there may be a mechanism to recreate the definition on the fly from
other information, but the same goes for the other view related base
tables in the DEFINITION_SCHEMA. I see no requirement to store only
the structure and not the SQL string.
While I don't really care about the way the structure of a view is
returned, I would very much like for it to be without those backticks.
Jochem
--
MySQL General Mailing List
For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql
To unsubscribe: http://lists.mysql.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
