Subject Re: [Firebird-Architect] RFC: Proposal for the implementation
Author Martijn Tonies
> > > First, I propose to rename the suggested RDB$RELATION_TYPE column to
> > > RDB$STORAGE_TYPE with possible values of 'PERMANENT', 'GLOBAL
> > > and 'LOCAL TEMPORARY'. Perhaps, external tables could use the value
> > > 'EXTERNAL'.
> >
> > And Views? "VIRTUAL"?
> Since views are not stored, I'd expect their RDB$STORAGE_TYPE to be NULL.
> Perhaps, some RDB$RELATION_TYPE also makes sense to clearly distinguish
> between tables and views (without selecting from RDB$VIEW_RELATIONS), but
> this is completely offtopic here.


Anyway, it might not be completely off-topic.

Perhaps it SHOULD be RELATION_TYPE -> after all, a view is a relation.
Why is "storage type" so important? Isn't that dependent of the relation
(base table, view, temp etc)

With regards,

Martijn Tonies
Database Workbench - developer tool for InterBase, Firebird, MySQL & MS SQL
Upscene Productions