db-derby-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Daniel John Debrunner <...@debrunners.com>
Subject Re: SQL/DDL Limitations (and DB2)
Date Mon, 20 Sep 2004 17:42:08 GMT
Brian McCallister wrote:

> There are a few artificial constraints (1) imposed on Derby, possibly 
> in the interest of making the DDL/SQL/etc exactly compatible with DB2 
> compared to prior versions of Cloudscape. In at least some cases (2) 
> these constraints are different from the SQL spec, and older versions 
> of Cloudscape (3)
> While I understand that the IBM developers may not be in a position to 
> undo these changes, is there any *technical* reason to limit Derby in 
> this way? If not, will patches submitted to undo these limitations be 
> accepted?

Such patches would be voted on by the community, as they are changes in
Derby's api. There may be justifible reasons to veto (-1 vote) a patch,
based on its (lack of) benefit to Derby, not to reasons associated with
IBM and/or DB2.

I believe that Derby stands as its own database as well as being a great
development database for later deployment on Derby or other databases
(see the scope section in the Derby proposal). I don't think Derby has
to go in only one direction or the other on those issues. So any change
should be made with the defined scope in mind.

Most likely increased limits would be in line with Derby's scope, but,
as an example, say if every other database had a constraint name limit
of 18 there would seem to be little benefit of Derby having a higher limit.


View raw message