db-derby-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Lance J. Andersen" <Lance.Ander...@Sun.COM>
Subject Re: updateRow() behavior difference between client and embedded drivers - which is right?
Date Mon, 10 Apr 2006 16:21:09 GMT
Just to be clear, the Proposed Final Draft is NOT available, to the JCP 
community at this time.  We are continuing to work on polishing the 
specification up as we move closer to the release of mustang.

Daniel John Debrunner wrote:
> David W. Van Couvering wrote:
>
>   
>> In inspecting the exceptions across client and embedded drivers, I
>> noticed that in the method updateRow(), if the current row has not been
>> modified, the client throws an exception.  However, the embedded driver
>> returns without taking any action and does not throw an exception.
>>
>> The JavaDoc for updateRow() says nothing about what behavior is expected.
>>
>> Does anyone know which one is correct?  Given a choice, I would prefer
>> the more forgiving implementation in the embedded driver.  An alternate
>> is to throw a SQLWarning rather than a SQLException.
>>
>> Once I have a better sense of what the right behavior is, I can log a
>> bug about this and attach it to our list of inconsistencies.
>>     
>
> JDBC 4.0 (proposed final draft) section 16.2.4.1
>
> "If the concurrency level is
> ResultSet.CONCUR_UPDATABLE and updateRow is called without changes being
> made to the row, the call will be considered a no-op."
>
> Thus it seems embedded is correct.
>
> Dan.
>
>   

Mime
View raw message