>> I do not consider the cross-database queries as something that should be
>> very flexible - at the end it is about integrating two databases, not
>> about acting as router to another DB.
>
> Why not? This is how "Linked Servers" work in MS SQL Server.

No problem, but how much infrastructure does it require to support it?

> If Firebird can do this without having to define the tables "locally", I
> think it's better.

Well... as you see, we would need to find a solution for SQLDA thing.
The issue that we're having with our 31-character limit on the object
identifiers is directly related to this, since if we start passing
128-byte-long table names, we can easy cause AV in client applications.
Same applies to extending XSQLVAR... we can't simply add new field to it
without changing the XSQLDA version, but if we do - we have to be sure
that every component suite is capable of supporting this.

> Of course, things would get complex if you actually tried using non-local
> tables in Stored Procedures with regard to binding of columns and run-time
> errors.

This can be handled by exception handling anyway... just another runtime
error.

Roman