Tim, can we get these patches into the next version of DBI?
Steffen Goeldner wrote:
>
> The result is the same, if the SQL in table_info() returns NULL for
> an unsupported part of the identifier. And it should do so according
> to the standard!
>
...
I agree with you in principle but beleive that the "feature" should stay
in but with a default of [0,1,2] to maintain conformance.
>
> See above. We need a standard conforming table_info() in each DBD
> and a patched tables() in DBI.
Yes and that need work too since different DBDs (RDBMs?) return
different column names - this does not comply with the DBI spec:
DBD::ODBC assumes that the returned column names are TABLE_CAT,
TABLE_SCHEM, TABLE_NAME but infact the underlying DBMS might return
different column names.
For example, Sybase ASA returns TABLE_QUALIFIER, TABLE_OWNER, TABLE_NAME
using the DBD::ODBC driver but returns the correct column names using
the DBD::ASAny and DBD::ADO drivers.
--
Simon Oliver
