Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-db-derby-dev-archive@www.apache.org Received: (qmail 83866 invoked from network); 5 Mar 2005 19:15:10 -0000 Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (209.237.227.199) by minotaur-2.apache.org with SMTP; 5 Mar 2005 19:15:10 -0000 Received: (qmail 4751 invoked by uid 500); 5 Mar 2005 19:15:09 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-db-derby-dev-archive@db.apache.org Received: (qmail 4728 invoked by uid 500); 5 Mar 2005 19:15:09 -0000 Mailing-List: contact derby-dev-help@db.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk list-help: list-unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: "Derby Development" Delivered-To: mailing list derby-dev@db.apache.org Received: (qmail 4715 invoked by uid 99); 5 Mar 2005 19:15:09 -0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.1 required=10.0 tests=FORGED_RCVD_HELO X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: neutral (hermes.apache.org: local policy) Received: from adsl-209-233-18-245.dsl.snfc21.pacbell.net (HELO buttons.boynes.com) (209.233.18.245) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.28) with ESMTP; Sat, 05 Mar 2005 11:15:08 -0800 Received: from [192.168.37.168] (unknown [192.168.37.168]) by buttons.boynes.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DB19C116C7 for ; Sat, 5 Mar 2005 11:15:05 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <422A052E.5070507@apache.org> Date: Sat, 05 Mar 2005 11:14:54 -0800 From: Jeremy Boynes User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 0.8 (Windows/20040913) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Derby Development Subject: Schema allowed in constraint name? X-Enigmail-Version: 0.86.1.0 X-Enigmail-Supports: pgp-inline, pgp-mime Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Virus-Checked: Checked X-Spam-Rating: minotaur-2.apache.org 1.6.2 0/1000/N In testing the fix for DERBY-158 (imply not null in primary key) I phave run into an issue with the db2Compatibility.sql test. It issues the following SQL: -- no schema names in constraint names (beetle 5143) CREATE TABLE S5143.T5143_1 (C1 int CONSTRAINT S5143.CPK1 PRIMARY KEY); CREATE TABLE S5143.T5143_2 (C1 int, C2 int, CONSTRAINT S5143.CPK1 PRIMARY KEY(C1,C2)); CREATE TABLE S5143.T5143_3 (C1 int, C2 int, CONSTRAINT S5143.C3 CHECK(C1 > C2)); These used to fail because C1/C2 did not have a NOT NULL constraint rather then because the schema name is being rejected; the third actually passes. Reading the spec, a is a which would make this syntax valid and the test invalid. If there no disagreements then I am going to remove these tests (and yes I know this may break DB2 compatibility ;-) ). -- Jeremy