db-derby-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Satheesh Bandaram <sathe...@Sourcery.Org>
Subject Re: [jira] Commented: (DERBY-337) dblook doesn't generate SQL statements for SQL functions.
Date Thu, 09 Jun 2005 22:11:25 GMT
Committed this patch. I don't think it is required to mark the field as
transient, though.

Satheesh

Army wrote:

> Satheesh Bandaram (JIRA) wrote:
>
>>     [
>> http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DERBY-337?page=comments#action_12313102
>> ]
>> Satheesh Bandaram commented on DERBY-337:
>> -----------------------------------------
>>
>> Submitted this patch. I do see you have changed RoutineAliasInfo, a
>> serialized java object that is saved in the disk. Please run some
>> soft upgrade tests, to make sure procedures/functions created in 10.0
>> are still usable in 10.1 in soft upgrade.
>
>
> Oh, good point.  This never even occurred to me.
>
>> I think new fields and new methods you have added for
>> RoutineAliasInfo may still make it compatible with 10.0 versions,
>> but we definitely need to check.
>
>
> I ran a simple check and it LOOKS like things are okay.  But that
> said, I ran the "serialver" executable to check the serialVersionUID
> of the class, and it has indeed changed with my patch--so I'm not sure
> this is a safe change.
>
> I then went back to my patch and I declared the new field as
> "transient"; after doing that, "serialver" returned the same long int
> for the RoutineAliasInfo before and after my change.  SO, I can either:
>
> 1) create another, 1-line patch that declares the new field as
> transient, OR
> 2) get rid of the new field altogether and just use "returnType ==
> null" checks to accomplish the same thing.  That was how I originally
> wrote the patch, but then I thought it'd be "better" to introduce this
> new field because it seems clearer to read:
>
> if (aliasType == AliasInfo.ALIAS_TYPE_PROCEDURE_AS_CHAR) ...
>
> than
>
> if (returnType == null) ...
>
> But I've added comments to the IF, so I guess either is probably okay...
>
> Any preference?
>
> Thanks for the review,
> Army
>
>
>


Mime
View raw message