> I have closed the issue.
>
> For me it is an external issue; we can't endorse all workarounds... if an
> RDBMS has an issue is not our problem and for some reason we give six ways
> to query the persistence (4 are completely OO).
>
> I would like heard your opinions.
I fail to see why the linq provider creates the second query
(@p0+'%').
The reason is that the StartsWith / EndsWith/Contains calls on
'string' are easy to deal with and you can just formulate a like query with
a pattern, no need for parameter concatenation (i.e.: the parameter value IS
the pattern).
I.o.w. a useless restriction (and IMHO a legitimate bugreport).
FB
