I am looking at adding parsing support for extension properties in the function models and
this brings up a few questions. Beyond additional metadata for the aggregate case, this
can also address
https://issues.jboss.org/browse/TEIIDDES-152 to add metadata for vararg,
nullOnNull, etc.
1. This seems slightly non-trival as there is a lot of associated metadata for every
single property. Will/can function metamodel properties end up in the properties index
which we can then merge as needed?
2. How are extension metadata prefixes being handled? Are they always being stripped from
property keys?
3. Now that the function model has lost it's special status within the runtime, there
isn't a reason going forward for having it separate from the relational model. What
is the effort involved (or level of desire) in combining it? I could assist in updating
the indexing logic.
----- Original Message -----
Just a heads up that language object changes for 8.0 are happening
under issue
https://issues.jboss.org/browse/TEIID-1560. The end
state should allow us to support user defined aggregate functions.
This will rely on the existing function model and extension
metadata rather than requiring a metamodel change.
Steve