That is not the solution because in OO what you have to write is:
"something".Should().StartsWith("some");but when you have to translate it for RDBMS you have to fit the mismatch translating it to a like 'some%' and ... var myPrefix = "so"; "something".Should().StartsWith(myPrefix + "m"); should be translated to like @prefix || 'm' || '%' On Tue, Jul 27, 2010 at 6:32 PM, Frans Bouma <[email protected]> wrote: > > 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 > > -- Fabio Maulo
