experiment addition of schema support #1
Conversation
* cleanup in Rezoom.SQL.Compiler.fsproj, ExprInfo.fs and TypeChecker.fs
| @@ -64,6 +69,8 @@ type private ModelChange(model : Model, inference : ITypeInferenceContext) = | |||
| return! ModelOps.dropView objName | |||
| | DropTable -> | |||
| return! ModelOps.dropTable objName | |||
| | DropSchema -> | |||
| return! ModelOps.dropSchema { Value = Some drop.ObjectName.ObjectName; Source = objName.Source } | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@rspeele: Note that it is ObjectName rather than SchemaName (used for schema qualified objects).
| @@ -280,6 +284,10 @@ and [<NoComparison>] | |||
| /// Resolve a reference to a table which may occur as part of a TableExpr. | |||
| /// This will resolve against the database model and CTEs, but not table aliases defined in the FROM clause. | |||
| member this.ResolveObjectReference(name : ObjectName, inferView) = | |||
| match this.Model.Schema (Some name.ObjectName) with | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@rspeele: This is simplest thing that seems to work.
I'm prepending any object resolution here, which may have an impact (no test failing though), should I only do that when the name.SchemaName is empty? or should it be handled another way?
|
Sorry I haven't had much time to look at this. I think resolving object name resolution like this might have problems if e.g. somebody makes a table in the default schema whose name collides with a schema name, then tries to drop that table. E.g. in sqlite I see for create schema, which is its own statement, you had the schema name be a |
No description provided.