db-derby-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Daniel John Debrunner <...@apache.org>
Subject Re: [jira] Commented: (DERBY-591) Several builtin functions are incorrectly exposed through the JDBC escaped function syntax {fn <function_call>}
Date Fri, 10 Feb 2006 20:21:13 GMT
Daniel John Debrunner wrote:

> Bernt M. Johnsen wrote:
> 
>>Moves to the mailing list.
>>
>>
>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Daniel John Debrunner (JIRA) wrote
(2006-02-10 15:54:59):
>>>
>>>   [ http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DERBY-591?page=comments#action_12365900
] 
>>
>>
>>>Daniel John Debrunner commented on DERBY-591:
>>>---------------------------------------------
>>>
>>>Not sure what you are asking here Bernt. This is a bug reporting
>>>that several Derby functions are incorrectly exposed thorugh the
>>>JDBC escaped function mechanism.  It's not about implementing more
>>>escaped functions.
>>
>>
>>Sorry if I was unclear. 
>>
>>I'll try again: Sateesh addresses those functions in SQL which are
>>*not* a part of the JDBC escaped-function-set as defined in the JDBC
>>spec (unless I misinterpreted). I want also to address the functions
>>defined in the JDBC-spec which have other names (and possibly other
>>arguments/argument-syntax) in the SQL standard. They're all
>>implemented today as if the JDBC escaped names are equal to the SQL
>>names.
>>
>>Was that clearer?

OK, I was being dense. :-)

To rephrase to ensure I understand, you want to implement functions that
are defined by the SQL standard, whose functionality is currently
implemented by JDBC escape functions. In some cases (not 'all', that was
throwing me) the SQL function is implemented in Derby today by function
with the same name as the JDBC escaped function name.

Sounds great, these would be all new Jira enhancements, nothing to do
with DERBY-591.

Sorry for any confusion,
Dan.


Mime
View raw message