In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Jochem van Dieten <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Since the is no requirement to have an accessible DEFINITION_SCHEMA > there may be a mechanism to recreate the definition on the fly from > other information, but the same goes for the other view related base > tables in the DEFINITION_SCHEMA. I see no requirement to store only > the structure and not the SQL string. You're right, my wording was sloppy. What I meant is that information_schema must be able to _return_ (not _store_) information about the structure. In theory this could be achieved by storing the original SQL string only and parsing it on the fly, but this looks clumsy to me. > While I don't really care about the way the structure of a view is > returned, I would very much like for it to be without those backticks. ... unless required if you use strange column names. I agree on that. -- MySQL General Mailing List For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql To unsubscribe: http://lists.mysql.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
