Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-db-derby-dev-archive@www.apache.org Received: (qmail 4277 invoked from network); 7 Mar 2006 01:55:54 -0000 Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (209.237.227.199) by minotaur.apache.org with SMTP; 7 Mar 2006 01:55:54 -0000 Received: (qmail 55355 invoked by uid 500); 7 Mar 2006 01:55:53 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-db-derby-dev-archive@db.apache.org Received: (qmail 55319 invoked by uid 500); 7 Mar 2006 01:55:53 -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: Delivered-To: mailing list derby-dev@db.apache.org Received: (qmail 55310 invoked by uid 99); 7 Mar 2006 01:55:53 -0000 Received: from asf.osuosl.org (HELO asf.osuosl.org) (140.211.166.49) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Mon, 06 Mar 2006 17:55:53 -0800 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=10.0 tests= X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received: from [192.87.106.226] (HELO ajax) (192.87.106.226) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Mon, 06 Mar 2006 17:55:52 -0800 Received: from ajax (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by ajax (Postfix) with ESMTP id E48C06ACAA for ; Tue, 7 Mar 2006 01:55:31 +0000 (GMT) Message-ID: <1946922820.1141696531933.JavaMail.jira@ajax> Date: Tue, 7 Mar 2006 01:55:31 +0000 (GMT) From: "Kathey Marsden (JIRA)" To: derby-dev@db.apache.org Subject: [jira] Commented: (DERBY-925) Implement new JDBC 4 metadata API getFunctionParameters() In-Reply-To: <1554293254.1139014924168.JavaMail.jira@ajax.apache.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org X-Spam-Rating: minotaur.apache.org 1.6.2 0/1000/N [ http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DERBY-925?page=comments#action_12369129 ] Kathey Marsden commented on DERBY-925: -------------------------------------- I'm interested to know the behaviour - if Server is at 10.1 and Client is at 10.2 - If server and client are at different jvm versions. This I guess is a general question about JDBC 4.0. What combinations should work and what errors are users going to see if it doesn't work? It sounds like the final conclusion was that metadata.properties won't change. If it does in the end need to change, I am curious the behaviour for soft upgrade and downgrade and soft upgrade again. This was handled in old Cloudscape versions by dropping and recreating the SPS's on every version change, but I think that is no longer done in Derby. > Implement new JDBC 4 metadata API getFunctionParameters() > --------------------------------------------------------- > > Key: DERBY-925 > URL: http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DERBY-925 > Project: Derby > Type: New Feature > Components: JDBC > Versions: 10.2.0.0 > Environment: JDK 1.6 > Reporter: David Van Couvering > Assignee: Dyre Tjeldvoll > Attachments: TypePrinter.java > > I am currently implementing this to return an empty result set so at least we're compliant, but we should be able to provide real metadata here. -- This message is automatically generated by JIRA. - If you think it was sent incorrectly contact one of the administrators: http://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/Administrators.jspa - For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira