[ https://jira.jboss.org/jira/browse/TEIID-186?page=com.atlassian.jira.plug... ] Steven Hawkins resolved TEIID-186. ---------------------------------- Fix Version/s: 7.0 (was: 8.0) Resolution: Won't Fix The consensus is that a Designer model represents the source metadata, while a Teiid schema represents our local database perspective of accessing that data. The confusing part is that the reconciliation is happening implicitly. At runtime imported catalogs and schemas are not proper metadata artifacts and simply become part of the table name. The biggest issues with this approach are: 1. that no additional runtime metadata is available for imported catalogs/schemas (which resolves this issue) 2. the model allows for ambiguous fully qualified names, since we allow catalog and schema to be siblings and have the same name - however this is fairly contrived. 3. even though the proper group name as reported by our JDBC metadata may be something like catalog.schema.table, we still allow it to resolve against the partial name table (this has been noted in the reference manual). If we were being strict we would expect the user to quote the table name as "catalog.schema.table". -- This message is automatically generated by JIRA. - If you think it was sent incorrectly contact one of the administrators: https://jira.jboss.org/jira/secure/Administrators.jspa - For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira