Subject | Missing dependencies |
---|---|
Author | Tetram Corp |
Post date | 2009-06-24T11:07:16Z |
Hi,
I'm using FB 1.5.5 and I'm facing a problem (well, it looks like one)
and I would to know if it is a known bug, a wanted feature or something
else.
My case:
I've got a view using some tables and some fields of those tables, of course
some of fields are used only in where clause, and some only in select clause
if I look at RDB$DEPENDENCIES, I see that:
one line for each field use in where clause
and one line with no field_name (is null)
same rdb$dependent_name, rdb$depended_on_name, rdb$dependent_type,
rdb$rdb$depended_on_type as other fields but no rdb$field_name
Even after compiling again my view, no change.
and no line mentioning fields in select clause only
So, is it normal ?
If not, could it be a problem in futur ? (as FB user I mean :-) )
could it be a good reason to force my boss to accept migration to FB 2.1
? ;-)
Thierry
I'm using FB 1.5.5 and I'm facing a problem (well, it looks like one)
and I would to know if it is a known bug, a wanted feature or something
else.
My case:
I've got a view using some tables and some fields of those tables, of course
some of fields are used only in where clause, and some only in select clause
if I look at RDB$DEPENDENCIES, I see that:
one line for each field use in where clause
and one line with no field_name (is null)
same rdb$dependent_name, rdb$depended_on_name, rdb$dependent_type,
rdb$rdb$depended_on_type as other fields but no rdb$field_name
Even after compiling again my view, no change.
and no line mentioning fields in select clause only
So, is it normal ?
If not, could it be a problem in futur ? (as FB user I mean :-) )
could it be a good reason to force my boss to accept migration to FB 2.1
? ;-)
Thierry