On Apr 9, 2010, at 9:30 AM, John Doyle wrote:

I have a use case, but I don't think you're going to like it, and we probably won't support it for now given the conversation we've had on client versions. Developing on different versions of Teiid within the same Designer instance.

This has been brought up before, and I agree it's a legitimate concern. However, keep in mind we're still planning on allowing the user to switch their default Teiid to another instance at any time, including the auto-migration of appropriate connection factories over to the new Teiid. Plus, I'm not sure this concern really impacts much whether we provide for arbitrary connection factory creation or connection factory property management in Designer.

It's also not hard for me to imagine that some of our more security conscious users would compartmentalize data across different physical systems/different networks. Now that I think about it I know of one existing user who does this. They develop VDBs for networks with different security profiles.

So, let me throw out my initial questions about use-cases and ask this differently: Is there any scenario where we think a user might discover they need to change their model structure or the contents of a transformation based upon previewing or testing queries to a VDB on one Teiid instance vs. another (outside of the Teiid version concern above)? If so, I'd agree we'd want to reconsider providing connection factory and associated property management directly from within Designer.