| Subject | RE: [firebird-support] Aliasing? |
|---|---|
| Author | Helen Borrie |
| Post date | 2009-04-22T23:16:55Z |
At 01:16 AM 23/04/2009, Rick Debay wrote:
1) that statement said exactly the opposite of what it was intended to say. Should be "Aliasing isn't meant to be used for a SINGLE object query."
2) a multi-object query is one that has joins and/or subquery expressions (including derived tables); also unions, if the set is unioned over multiple instances of the same table.
=======
BTW, please a) don't top-post in your replies; and b) do something about your company's confidentiality message appearing in your list posts.
=======
^ heLen ^
>> Do you happen to be presenting this syntax via an app that uses IBO?Sorry,
>Yes, I'm using IBO via Database Workbench Pro 3.3.
>
>> Aliasing isn't meant to be used for a multi-object query
>Excuse my ignorance, but what is a multi-object query?
1) that statement said exactly the opposite of what it was intended to say. Should be "Aliasing isn't meant to be used for a SINGLE object query."
2) a multi-object query is one that has joins and/or subquery expressions (including derived tables); also unions, if the set is unioned over multiple instances of the same table.
>> IBO's parser adds RDB$DB_KEY to the output list automaticallyThat doesn't seem justified unless you're determined to continue using the wrong syntax for a single-object query (or indeed, any other wrong syntaxes that older Firebird versions would tolerate). However, ISQL *is* version specific, so Fb 1.5's isql should permit that wrong syntax, if you got away with it before. Reverting to an older version of DBW (preceding the upgrade to IBO 4.8) should also do the trick.
>So I assume I should test this using isql (which is what will run the
>command in production anyway) instead of continuing with DBW.
>> It [change to the API] is not supposed to matterIMO, there's no point, as it isn't due to a Firebird bug, and you won't be reporting anything that is not known and documented. OTOH, it would be worth drawing Martijn's attention to it (via firebird-tools or, better, Upscene's own newsgroups). I don't use DBW but I'd be surprised if it didn't have an option to pass raw SQL and also to avoid KeyLinks.
>Should I file something with the tracker? If so, what would I report?
>Besides the aliasing issue I ran in to when trying to test the storedI have no idea: test the SP in isql and see whether it excepts or gives wrong results. In that environment, you will at least be clear of anything that reinterprets your client-side SQL (which is what - CORRECTLY - caused your exception when you called it from DBW with the wrong aliasing syntax).
>procedure, is the actual procedure, as posted, sound?
=======
BTW, please a) don't top-post in your replies; and b) do something about your company's confidentiality message appearing in your list posts.
=======
^ heLen ^