db-derby-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Dyre.Tjeldv...@Sun.COM
Subject Re: [jira] Commented: (DERBY-924) new JDBC4 metadata API getFunctions() needs to be implemented
Date Mon, 10 Apr 2006 13:53:10 GMT
"Knut Anders Hatlen (JIRA)" <derby-dev@db.apache.org> writes:

>     [ http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DERBY-924?page=comments#action_12373839 ]

>
> Knut Anders Hatlen commented on DERBY-924:
> ------------------------------------------
>
> The patch looks very good. There are however two issues that I would
> like to have resolved before I commit the patch.
>
> 1) In DatabaseMetaData.getFunctionsX() you have this comment:
>
>        // Uncomment the following line when DERBY-970 is committed
>        // checkServerJdbcVersionX() 
>
>    Since your patch is likely to get into trunk before my DERBY-970
>    patch, please copy checkServerJdbcVersionX() into your patch and
>    enable the check.

Well, I tried applying that part of your 970 patch to my sandbox, but
since clientmessages_en.properties has been removed and the messages
in it given new messageIds, it was impossible :(

When you coded your patch, SQLState.java looked as follows:

     String NOT_IMPLEMENTED                                          = "0A000.S";
     String JDBC_METHOD_NOT_IMPLEMENTED                              = "0AX01.S";
+    String JDBC_METHOD_NOT_SUPPORTED_BY_SERVER                      = "0AX02.S";

Since then NOT_IMPLEMENTED and JDBC_METHOD_NOT_IMPLEMENTED has both
gotten new ids (with the same 5 char prefix):

    String NOT_IMPLEMENTED                                          = "0A000.S";    String
JDBC_METHOD_NOT_IMPLEMENTED                              = "0A000.S.1");

So clearly your proposed id doesn't quite fit in. Do you have another
suggestion? "0A000.S.2" maybe?

-- 
dt


Mime
View raw message