MSSQL has a history of confusion about what is owner and what is schema,
and there has been shifting back and forth over the years as they tried to
decide if they wanted to be like Oracle, or like Sybase.
Recently the 2005 version added real schemas as well, so a table
identifier can I believe
I don't think so, not directly.
Short-term, here's a couple of things to try:
-- you may be able to create views in the local database that reference the
warehouse tables, and access these views as if they were local tables.
-- you may be able to hack up something by using the schema support in
Hi Rick,
On Jun 5, 4:05 pm, Rick Morrison [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I don't think so, not directly.
I was afraid of this.
Short-term, here's a couple of things to try:
[snip suggestions]
I appreciate the suggestions. I may see about adding a view for this
purpose. We decided against it when
On Jun 5, 2007, at 4:05 PM, Rick Morrison wrote:
I don't think so, not directly.
Short-term, here's a couple of things to try:
-- you may be able to create views in the local database that
reference the warehouse tables, and access these views as if they
were local tables.
-- you
ah, well the owner attribute is news to me, and if that's already
supported all the way through SA, and if the dialect can build the
schema.owner.table string, then that's already a
huge part of the way there.
As for DBAPI concerns, I know that at least pymssql will take the
database.owner.table
