I like the term virtual 'cause that's exactly what they are.. a table that does not really exist in the db and is provided by some other system. This is not inconsistent with other DBMS's which use terms like "virtualized view", both are tables that are not linked to underlying physical data. The fact that the mechanism which provides these tables is different does not mean they are not both validly virtual tables.
Sam ------------------------------------------- We're Hiring! Seeking a passionate developer to join our team building Flex based products. Position is in the Washington D.C. metro area. If interested contact [EMAIL PROTECTED] -----Original Message----- From: Joe Wilson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, November 01, 2007 5:33 PM To: sqlite-users@sqlite.org Subject: Re: [sqlite] How many virtual table implemenations are there out there? I agree. How about "Synthetic Table" or "Abstract Table"? --- Darren Duncan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > While you're at it, I strongly recommend changing the feature name > from "virtual table" to "federated table", or at least not something > called "virtual", because the older/current name is a source of > confusion. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] -----------------------------------------------------------------------------