Re: Name for new function

On Mon, 17 Jul 2000, Igmar Palsenberg wrote: > I agree that it's not the right way to go. The real solution lies within > MySQL. But since a 'top priority' job with MySQL takes several years, I > don't see a quick solution for now. > > This patch (in this form, or located somewhere else) should be considered > a temprary solution. What I (and several others) have wondered, is why do the people in question not just write joins in the first place (which, if written properly, should work on any SQL-compliant DB), instead of having to go through this nasty hack... -- Dominic J. Eidson "Baruk Khazad! Khazad ai-menu!" - Gimli ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- http://www.the-infinite.org/ http://www.the-infinite.org/~dominic/