[ https://issues.jboss.org/browse/TEIID-4119?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin... ] Steven Hawkins commented on TEIID-4119: --------------------------------------- Ignore the previous comment. In re-examining what is being asked for here, there are a couple of clarifications to be made. reportAsViews does not affect this case directly - it will have no influence on odbc behavior. However what the customer is effectively looking for is the inverse of reportAsView for odbc - they want a "base table" added to a virtual model to be reported as a table. In reality any table construct added to a virtual model is a view and will have a view definition. It is a quirk of the metadata system (that was attempting to cover both physical and virtual cases in the same metamodel) as to why it's referred to as a base table when adding a child to the model. Starting with Teiid 7 (which was still consistent with mmx logic), we effectively were only looking at the virtual flag to determine if something is a view. Is there a compelling reason why the customer needs a Teiid virtual table / view reported to their client as a table? If they simply need them reported consistently, then the recommendation would be to use reportAsViews=true for their client connections. Otherwise if they are going directly against SYS.Tables, then they'll need to look at both the type and the virtual flag. -- This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA (v6.4.11#64026)