Hi Villas - you know it is quite possible i overlooked the obvious ;)
Ok, yeah.... had to check what I had asked back then. Yup, that was
great! and it still works great, no doubt about that. the thing is in
this case, we can create tables alright (even recreate them if need
be, or import them). The problem is, every identical process will have
the same tables and same names and I need to centralize them somehow
(especially, if we can't establish remote connections throuh script).
I am almost almost certain that if I say "yeah, it used to be in table
'changes', now its in table 'changesX'"... it will cause mass
confusion, like a meltdown ;)
so the hope would be to do something like this:
/databases/...product/branch/<build_version>/
TABLES_FOR_THAT_SPECIFIC_BUILD
the path would match the path to the same build on the file server
where the builds get stored.
Thanks for the reply :)
On Feb 1, 8:23 pm, villas <[email protected]> wrote:
> Hi Mart,
> I thought you'd already solved that one in a previous thread named
> 'tables created dynamically'?
> I am just reminding you of the thread in case you'd overlooked that
> interesting answer by Massimo.
> Sorry if that hasn't helped, I do not know of any better answer.
> Best regards,
> David
>
> On Feb 1, 5:14 pm, mart <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > Hi,
>
> > Say a process generates a DB and a set of tables, and say this process
> > is repeated multple times: Is it possible to add tables (as opposed to
> > merging) to an existing DB? Since once set of tables have the same
> > names as another, ideally the tables could live in a separate folder
> > (uniquely named)... I'm not too hopeful, but is something like this
> > possible?
>
> > thanks,
> > Mart :)
