Hello Jim,
> On Wed, Sep 21, 2005 at 12:23:57PM +0200, Martijn Tonies wrote:
> > Did I just see in the documentation that the "comment" clause
> > is being misused to supply a connection string for the federated
> > engine?
> >
> > If so, I sure hope it will be changed before the final 5.0 releas
On Wed, Sep 21, 2005 at 12:23:57PM +0200, Martijn Tonies wrote:
> Did I just see in the documentation that the "comment" clause
> is being misused to supply a connection string for the federated
> engine?
>
> If so, I sure hope it will be changed before the final 5.0 release.
This is fixed in 5.0
> > On Wednesday 21 September 2005 11:23, Martijn Tonies typed:
> > > Hi there,
> > >
> > > Did I just see in the documentation that the "comment" clause
> > > is being misused to supply a connection string for the federated
> > > engine?
> > >
> > > If so, I sure hope it will be changed before t
> On Wednesday 21 September 2005 11:23, Martijn Tonies typed:
> > Hi there,
> >
> > Did I just see in the documentation that the "comment" clause
> > is being misused to supply a connection string for the federated
> > engine?
> >
> > If so, I sure hope it will be changed before the final 5.0 relea
On Wednesday 21 September 2005 11:23, Martijn Tonies typed:
> Hi there,
>
> Did I just see in the documentation that the "comment" clause
> is being misused to supply a connection string for the federated
> engine?
>
> If so, I sure hope it will be changed before the final 5.0 release.
>
> "comment
Hi there,
Did I just see in the documentation that the "comment" clause
is being misused to supply a connection string for the federated
engine?
If so, I sure hope it will be changed before the final 5.0 release.
"comment" is next to useless like this. It's already being misused
by InnoDB to des
