[
http://opensource.atlassian.com/projects/hibernate/browse/HHH-1476?page=c...
]
Max Rydahl Andersen commented on HHH-1476:
------------------------------------------
is it really necessary to change public api on Table to support this ?!
Table.qualify does not handle dialect diferences
------------------------------------------------
Key: HHH-1476
URL:
http://opensource.atlassian.com/projects/hibernate/browse/HHH-1476
Project: Hibernate3
Issue Type: Bug
Components: core
Environment: Hibernate 3.1.2
SQL Server 2000
Reporter: Justin Kolb
Attachments: informix-table-qname-patch.diff
The fix for HHH-699 caused me to discover that Hibernate isn't handling qualifying
table names properly. It can be inferred from HHH-699 that not all databases are similar
in this respect so I think this should be added to the dialect handling. From my short
research I have the following 3 cases:
SQL Server: database.owner.table
MySQL: database.table (no schemas it seems)
Most others: catalog.schema.table
SQL Server also allows for "database..table" since it does not have schemas but
does allow you to write queries that cross databases similar to how you can cross schemas
in other database servers.
Testing on Postgres though I determined that it does not allow "catalog..table"
and will only accept "catalog.schema.table", so it dos not match up with SQL
Server in this respect. If you write "catalog.table" it thinks you are trying to
use a schema so it does not match up with MySQL in this respect.
So right now only MySQL and SQL Server are the non standard compliant databases. Before
3.1 beta 1, SQL Server was handled correctly; then after that only MySQL was handled
correctly.
I'm not sure how much work it would take to make this change.
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
If you think it was sent incorrectly contact one of the administrators:
http://opensource.atlassian.com/projects/hibernate/secure/Administrators....
-
For more information on JIRA, see:
http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira