Re: Why SQL_PUBLIC is appending to Cache name while using JDBC thin driver
Val, You are right. Two tables with equal names in different schemas should refer to two caches with unique names. On Wed, Oct 11, 2017 at 7:48 PM, Valentin Kulichenko < valentin.kuliche...@gmail.com> wrote: > I would let Vladimir confirm this, but I believe he talks about cache name, > not table name. Cache name obviously has to be unique across all schemas, > and attaching schema name to it makes sense to me. > > -Val > > On Mon, Oct 9, 2017 at 12:48 PM Dmitriy Setrakyan <dsetrak...@apache.org> > wrote: > > > On Mon, Oct 9, 2017 at 12:05 PM, Vladimir Ozerov <voze...@gridgain.com> > > wrote: > > > > > Because it should be possible to have two tables with the same name in > > > different schemas. > > > > > > > Still confused. If we have multiple schemas with the same table/cache > name, > > the schema name should be enough to identify a table. Currently, using > your > > words, the solution looks like a "hack". Why not just remove the prefix > and > > check for uniqueness within a schema? > > > > D. > > > > > > > > > > On Mon, Oct 9, 2017 at 9:21 PM, Dmitriy Setrakyan < > dsetrak...@apache.org > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > On Mon, Oct 9, 2017 at 1:27 AM, Vladimir Ozerov < > voze...@gridgain.com> > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > Hi Dima, > > > > > > > > > > To maintain unique cache names across the cluster. > > > > > > > > > > > > > Why not simply check for uniqueness at creation time? Why introduce > > some > > > > automatic prefix? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Mon, Oct 9, 2017 at 7:34 AM, Dmitriy Setrakyan < > > > dsetrak...@apache.org > > > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > Cross-sending to dev@ > > > > > > > > > > > > Why do we need to append SQL_PUBLIC_ to all table names? > > > > > > > > > > > > D. > > > > > > > > > > > > -- Forwarded message -- > > > > > > From: Denis Magda <dma...@gridgain.com> > > > > > > Date: Sun, Oct 8, 2017 at 7:01 AM > > > > > > Subject: Re: Why SQL_PUBLIC is appending to Cache name while > using > > > JDBC > > > > > > thin driver > > > > > > To: "u...@ignite.apache.org" <u...@ignite.apache.org> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Hi Austin, > > > > > > > > > > > > Yes, it will be possible to pass a cache name you like into > CREATE > > > > TABLE > > > > > > command in 2.3. The release should be available in a couple of > > weeks. > > > > > > Follow our announcements. > > > > > > > > > > > > Denis > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Saturday, October 7, 2017, austin solomon < > > > > > austin.solomon...@gmail.com> > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > Hi, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I am using Ignite version 2.2.0, and I have created a table > using > > > > > > > IgniteJdbcThinDriver. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > When I checked the cache in Ignite Visor I'm seeing > > > > > > SQL_PUBLIC_{TABLE-NAME} > > > > > > > is appended. > > > > > > > Is their a way to get rid of this. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I want to remove the SQL_PUBLIC from the cache name. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks, > > > > > > > Austin > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > > > Sent from: http://apache-ignite-users.70518.x6.nabble.com/ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
Re: Why SQL_PUBLIC is appending to Cache name while using JDBC thin driver
I would let Vladimir confirm this, but I believe he talks about cache name, not table name. Cache name obviously has to be unique across all schemas, and attaching schema name to it makes sense to me. -Val On Mon, Oct 9, 2017 at 12:48 PM Dmitriy Setrakyan <dsetrak...@apache.org> wrote: > On Mon, Oct 9, 2017 at 12:05 PM, Vladimir Ozerov <voze...@gridgain.com> > wrote: > > > Because it should be possible to have two tables with the same name in > > different schemas. > > > > Still confused. If we have multiple schemas with the same table/cache name, > the schema name should be enough to identify a table. Currently, using your > words, the solution looks like a "hack". Why not just remove the prefix and > check for uniqueness within a schema? > > D. > > > > > > On Mon, Oct 9, 2017 at 9:21 PM, Dmitriy Setrakyan <dsetrak...@apache.org > > > > wrote: > > > > > On Mon, Oct 9, 2017 at 1:27 AM, Vladimir Ozerov <voze...@gridgain.com> > > > wrote: > > > > > > > Hi Dima, > > > > > > > > To maintain unique cache names across the cluster. > > > > > > > > > > Why not simply check for uniqueness at creation time? Why introduce > some > > > automatic prefix? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Mon, Oct 9, 2017 at 7:34 AM, Dmitriy Setrakyan < > > dsetrak...@apache.org > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > Cross-sending to dev@ > > > > > > > > > > Why do we need to append SQL_PUBLIC_ to all table names? > > > > > > > > > > D. > > > > > > > > > > -- Forwarded message -- > > > > > From: Denis Magda <dma...@gridgain.com> > > > > > Date: Sun, Oct 8, 2017 at 7:01 AM > > > > > Subject: Re: Why SQL_PUBLIC is appending to Cache name while using > > JDBC > > > > > thin driver > > > > > To: "u...@ignite.apache.org" <u...@ignite.apache.org> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Hi Austin, > > > > > > > > > > Yes, it will be possible to pass a cache name you like into CREATE > > > TABLE > > > > > command in 2.3. The release should be available in a couple of > weeks. > > > > > Follow our announcements. > > > > > > > > > > Denis > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Saturday, October 7, 2017, austin solomon < > > > > austin.solomon...@gmail.com> > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > Hi, > > > > > > > > > > > > I am using Ignite version 2.2.0, and I have created a table using > > > > > > IgniteJdbcThinDriver. > > > > > > > > > > > > When I checked the cache in Ignite Visor I'm seeing > > > > > SQL_PUBLIC_{TABLE-NAME} > > > > > > is appended. > > > > > > Is their a way to get rid of this. > > > > > > > > > > > > I want to remove the SQL_PUBLIC from the cache name. > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks, > > > > > > Austin > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > > Sent from: http://apache-ignite-users.70518.x6.nabble.com/ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
Re: Why SQL_PUBLIC is appending to Cache name while using JDBC thin driver
On Mon, Oct 9, 2017 at 12:05 PM, Vladimir Ozerov <voze...@gridgain.com> wrote: > Because it should be possible to have two tables with the same name in > different schemas. > Still confused. If we have multiple schemas with the same table/cache name, the schema name should be enough to identify a table. Currently, using your words, the solution looks like a "hack". Why not just remove the prefix and check for uniqueness within a schema? D. > > On Mon, Oct 9, 2017 at 9:21 PM, Dmitriy Setrakyan <dsetrak...@apache.org> > wrote: > > > On Mon, Oct 9, 2017 at 1:27 AM, Vladimir Ozerov <voze...@gridgain.com> > > wrote: > > > > > Hi Dima, > > > > > > To maintain unique cache names across the cluster. > > > > > > > Why not simply check for uniqueness at creation time? Why introduce some > > automatic prefix? > > > > > > > > > > On Mon, Oct 9, 2017 at 7:34 AM, Dmitriy Setrakyan < > dsetrak...@apache.org > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > Cross-sending to dev@ > > > > > > > > Why do we need to append SQL_PUBLIC_ to all table names? > > > > > > > > D. > > > > > > > > -- Forwarded message -- > > > > From: Denis Magda <dma...@gridgain.com> > > > > Date: Sun, Oct 8, 2017 at 7:01 AM > > > > Subject: Re: Why SQL_PUBLIC is appending to Cache name while using > JDBC > > > > thin driver > > > > To: "u...@ignite.apache.org" <u...@ignite.apache.org> > > > > > > > > > > > > Hi Austin, > > > > > > > > Yes, it will be possible to pass a cache name you like into CREATE > > TABLE > > > > command in 2.3. The release should be available in a couple of weeks. > > > > Follow our announcements. > > > > > > > > Denis > > > > > > > > > > > > On Saturday, October 7, 2017, austin solomon < > > > austin.solomon...@gmail.com> > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > Hi, > > > > > > > > > > I am using Ignite version 2.2.0, and I have created a table using > > > > > IgniteJdbcThinDriver. > > > > > > > > > > When I checked the cache in Ignite Visor I'm seeing > > > > SQL_PUBLIC_{TABLE-NAME} > > > > > is appended. > > > > > Is their a way to get rid of this. > > > > > > > > > > I want to remove the SQL_PUBLIC from the cache name. > > > > > > > > > > Thanks, > > > > > Austin > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > Sent from: http://apache-ignite-users.70518.x6.nabble.com/ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
Re: Why SQL_PUBLIC is appending to Cache name while using JDBC thin driver
Because it should be possible to have two tables with the same name in different schemas. On Mon, Oct 9, 2017 at 9:21 PM, Dmitriy Setrakyan <dsetrak...@apache.org> wrote: > On Mon, Oct 9, 2017 at 1:27 AM, Vladimir Ozerov <voze...@gridgain.com> > wrote: > > > Hi Dima, > > > > To maintain unique cache names across the cluster. > > > > Why not simply check for uniqueness at creation time? Why introduce some > automatic prefix? > > > > > > On Mon, Oct 9, 2017 at 7:34 AM, Dmitriy Setrakyan <dsetrak...@apache.org > > > > wrote: > > > > > Cross-sending to dev@ > > > > > > Why do we need to append SQL_PUBLIC_ to all table names? > > > > > > D. > > > > > > ------ Forwarded message ------ > > > From: Denis Magda <dma...@gridgain.com> > > > Date: Sun, Oct 8, 2017 at 7:01 AM > > > Subject: Re: Why SQL_PUBLIC is appending to Cache name while using JDBC > > > thin driver > > > To: "u...@ignite.apache.org" <u...@ignite.apache.org> > > > > > > > > > Hi Austin, > > > > > > Yes, it will be possible to pass a cache name you like into CREATE > TABLE > > > command in 2.3. The release should be available in a couple of weeks. > > > Follow our announcements. > > > > > > Denis > > > > > > > > > On Saturday, October 7, 2017, austin solomon < > > austin.solomon...@gmail.com> > > > wrote: > > > > > > > Hi, > > > > > > > > I am using Ignite version 2.2.0, and I have created a table using > > > > IgniteJdbcThinDriver. > > > > > > > > When I checked the cache in Ignite Visor I'm seeing > > > SQL_PUBLIC_{TABLE-NAME} > > > > is appended. > > > > Is their a way to get rid of this. > > > > > > > > I want to remove the SQL_PUBLIC from the cache name. > > > > > > > > Thanks, > > > > Austin > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > Sent from: http://apache-ignite-users.70518.x6.nabble.com/ > > > > > > > > > >
Re: Why SQL_PUBLIC is appending to Cache name while using JDBC thin driver
On Mon, Oct 9, 2017 at 1:27 AM, Vladimir Ozerov <voze...@gridgain.com> wrote: > Hi Dima, > > To maintain unique cache names across the cluster. > Why not simply check for uniqueness at creation time? Why introduce some automatic prefix? > > On Mon, Oct 9, 2017 at 7:34 AM, Dmitriy Setrakyan <dsetrak...@apache.org> > wrote: > > > Cross-sending to dev@ > > > > Why do we need to append SQL_PUBLIC_ to all table names? > > > > D. > > > > -- Forwarded message -- > > From: Denis Magda <dma...@gridgain.com> > > Date: Sun, Oct 8, 2017 at 7:01 AM > > Subject: Re: Why SQL_PUBLIC is appending to Cache name while using JDBC > > thin driver > > To: "u...@ignite.apache.org" <u...@ignite.apache.org> > > > > > > Hi Austin, > > > > Yes, it will be possible to pass a cache name you like into CREATE TABLE > > command in 2.3. The release should be available in a couple of weeks. > > Follow our announcements. > > > > Denis > > > > > > On Saturday, October 7, 2017, austin solomon < > austin.solomon...@gmail.com> > > wrote: > > > > > Hi, > > > > > > I am using Ignite version 2.2.0, and I have created a table using > > > IgniteJdbcThinDriver. > > > > > > When I checked the cache in Ignite Visor I'm seeing > > SQL_PUBLIC_{TABLE-NAME} > > > is appended. > > > Is their a way to get rid of this. > > > > > > I want to remove the SQL_PUBLIC from the cache name. > > > > > > Thanks, > > > Austin > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > Sent from: http://apache-ignite-users.70518.x6.nabble.com/ > > > > > >
Re: Why SQL_PUBLIC is appending to Cache name while using JDBC thin driver
Hi Dima, To maintain unique cache names across the cluster. On Mon, Oct 9, 2017 at 7:34 AM, Dmitriy Setrakyan <dsetrak...@apache.org> wrote: > Cross-sending to dev@ > > Why do we need to append SQL_PUBLIC_ to all table names? > > D. > > -- Forwarded message -- > From: Denis Magda <dma...@gridgain.com> > Date: Sun, Oct 8, 2017 at 7:01 AM > Subject: Re: Why SQL_PUBLIC is appending to Cache name while using JDBC > thin driver > To: "u...@ignite.apache.org" <u...@ignite.apache.org> > > > Hi Austin, > > Yes, it will be possible to pass a cache name you like into CREATE TABLE > command in 2.3. The release should be available in a couple of weeks. > Follow our announcements. > > Denis > > > On Saturday, October 7, 2017, austin solomon <austin.solomon...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > > Hi, > > > > I am using Ignite version 2.2.0, and I have created a table using > > IgniteJdbcThinDriver. > > > > When I checked the cache in Ignite Visor I'm seeing > SQL_PUBLIC_{TABLE-NAME} > > is appended. > > Is their a way to get rid of this. > > > > I want to remove the SQL_PUBLIC from the cache name. > > > > Thanks, > > Austin > > > > > > > > -- > > Sent from: http://apache-ignite-users.70518.x6.nabble.com/ > > >
Fwd: Why SQL_PUBLIC is appending to Cache name while using JDBC thin driver
Cross-sending to dev@ Why do we need to append SQL_PUBLIC_ to all table names? D. -- Forwarded message -- From: Denis Magda <dma...@gridgain.com> Date: Sun, Oct 8, 2017 at 7:01 AM Subject: Re: Why SQL_PUBLIC is appending to Cache name while using JDBC thin driver To: "u...@ignite.apache.org" <u...@ignite.apache.org> Hi Austin, Yes, it will be possible to pass a cache name you like into CREATE TABLE command in 2.3. The release should be available in a couple of weeks. Follow our announcements. Denis On Saturday, October 7, 2017, austin solomon <austin.solomon...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi, > > I am using Ignite version 2.2.0, and I have created a table using > IgniteJdbcThinDriver. > > When I checked the cache in Ignite Visor I'm seeing SQL_PUBLIC_{TABLE-NAME} > is appended. > Is their a way to get rid of this. > > I want to remove the SQL_PUBLIC from the cache name. > > Thanks, > Austin > > > > -- > Sent from: http://apache-ignite-users.70518.x6.nabble.com/ >