And would this still support the multiple-files-in-a-directory
use-case? I.e., can wild-cards be incorporated into these filenames (wherever they are
stored)? Perhaps using a function as suggested would be better for this example, where
logic could be used to determine the file/pathnames at query time.
Best regards,
Chuck
----- Original Message -----
From: "John Doyle" <jdoyle(a)redhat.com>
To: "Steven Hawkins" <shawkins(a)redhat.com>
Cc: "teiid-dev" <teiid-dev(a)lists.jboss.org>
Sent: Friday, May 21, 2010 11:11:43 AM GMT -05:00 US/Canada Eastern
Subject: Re: [teiid-dev] alternative to the text connector / translator
----- "Steven Hawkins" <shawkins(a)redhat.com> wrote:
> Assuming the use of a simple file translator/ resource adapter
> procedure to get files, the downside to either approach is that
> relative file names would now be stored on either the model or in a
> function.
>
> I support the second, since it completely removes the need for a
> heavy-weight text translator and is feasible before RC1.
>
>
I like the second solution as well. It's consistent with the move made with XML.
But why relative paths, why not absolute paths?
> Steve
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> teiid-dev mailing list
> teiid-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
>
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/teiid-dev
>
_______________________________________________
teiid-dev mailing list
teiid-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/teiid-dev
_______________________________________________
teiid-dev mailing list
teiid-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/teiid-dev
--
Ken Johnson
Sr. Product Manager
JBoss Middleware Business Unit
Red Hat, Inc
978.392.3917
ken.johnson(a)redhat.com