[ATTENTION] Chat with Frank about 3.1 cool news :-)

[erne]

on 25-06-2007 13:26, Ruslan Zasukhin at sunshine at public.kherson.ua wrote:

> On 25/6/07 1:45 PM, "Erne" <ernestogiannotta at tiscalinet.it> wrote:
> 
> Hi Erne,
> 
>> Hi Ruslan,
>> 
>> thanks for answering
>> 
>> I'm talking about ambiguos links where we need specify what links to use
>> 
>> say we have TableA, TableB, TableC, AtoB_Link, AtoB_Link, AtoC_Link
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> 
> I assume AtoB_Link, AtoB_Link2,

well it was BtoC_Link in my mind, but whatever will do :-)

> 
>> Select * from TableA, TableB, TableC  // will spawn an Ambiguos link
>> exception
>> 
>> so we must code:
>> 
>> select * from TableA
>> join TableB on AtoB_Link
>> join TableC On AtoB_Link
>> 

and here I made mistake also, I meant

join TableC On BtoC_Link

>> I'm asking for the ability to write:
>> 
>> Select * from TableA, TableB, TableC
>> join using AtoB_Link, BtoC_Link
> 
> No no, this is not good idea.
> 

Oh well, I just gave it a try... ;-)

> But what you can do now is:
> 
> Valentina will be happy if you specify link ONLY for ambigous 2 tables:
> 
> 
> select * 
> from 
> TableA join TableB using AtoB_Link
> join TableC
> 
> 
> Looks on this as
> 
> 
> select * 
> from 
> (TableA join TableB using AtoB_Link)  '' produce TmpT
> join TableC                    '' Tmpt join TableC
> 
> 
>

Yes, but this internal implementation right?

I just lazy and wanted to leave it all on Vale just like I used to

my point is: all needed info is there in the links definitions,
no need to tell which tables to join,
up to Vale how to best use them,
providing there's no ambiguity of course

(mmm... come to think... maybe you plan to implement Vlink between more than
2 tables? what that BranchCount prop is for otherwise?)


thanks for listening



Cool Runnings,
Erne.

-- 
| e r |  Ernesto Giannotta
| n e |  Musical Box - a media store