Allan, Thank you very much for the reply. You are correct when stating that, according to SQLite documentation this SQL syntax is not expected to work. Therefore, it is not a bug. Perhaps it should be added to the list of SQL92 features unsupported by SQLite.
But I am asking myself: was that omission deliberate or just an oversight? One possible answer would be that, when designing the attaching feature, the developers started from the following requirement: "We want the queries in attached databases to behave exactly like in the main database, with one exception: no support for the syntax [database_name].[table_name].* because it's too much work or for some other reason. We will support this later if users ask for it." If that was the case, then by all means ticket 4037 is a feature request. But as you pointed out, it seems logical for this to work so I tend to believe it was an oversight. In which case one might argue it's still a feature request, however it would be closer to the grey area between bugs and feature requests. If this is a feature request, I would give it a higher priority than 'nice to have'. I suppose it would be much easier to add this feature than it was to add, say, foreign key support. I still can't explain why this syntax error was not reported earlier, as I ran into this issue shortly after adding support for attached databases in my project. Perhaps the usage of attached databases in SQLite is not as widespread as one might expect? Again, many thanks. Bogdan Ureche _______________________________________________ sqlite-users mailing list [email protected] http://sqlite.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sqlite-users
