db-derby-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Rick Hillegas <Richard.Hille...@Sun.COM>
Subject Re: Collation feature discussion
Date Mon, 19 Mar 2007 21:53:01 GMT
Mamta Satoor wrote:
> Dan, I looked at the SQL 2002 foundation specification.
>  
> TRIM, UPPER, LOWER, SUBSTRING functions are covered in Section 6.29 
> <string value function> and it says that these functions will get the 
> collation of their operand. For instance, Syntax Rule (4b) says this 
> for SUBSTRING function "The character set and collation of the 
> <character substring function> are those of DTCVE." DTCVE is the 
> declared type of the <character value expression>. Same thing is 
> implied for UPPER and LOWER functions (Syntax Rule 8), TRIM function 
> (Syntax Rule 11).
>  
> I am not too clear on what happens when CAST is used. SQL spec 
> discusses this in section 6.12 <cast specification> and says in Syntax 
> Rule 10) that "The declared type collation of the <cast specification> 
> is the character set collation of the character set of TD and its 
> collation derivation is implicit." So for the eg case CAST(charC1 as 
> VARCHAR(30)), what will be the collation of VARHCHAR(30) value? Is 
> Derby's character set's collation is UCS_BASIC? If so, then will the 
> CAST value (if casted to one of the character datatypes) always have 
> collation of UCS_BASIC no matter if charC1 has UCS_BASIC / 
> TERRITORY_BASED collation?
Hi Mamta,

You've probably seen this in section 6.1: as part of the CAST, you can 
specify the collation you want. E.g.:

  CAST englishColumn as VARCHAR(300) COLLATE germanCollation

Regards,
-Rick
>  
> As for concatenation, Section 9.3 Data types of results of 
> aggregations has Sytax Rules 2)All of the data types shall be 
> comparable. I take that to mean that 
> userChar1WithTerritoryBasedCollation can't be concatenated with 
> systemChar1 because systemChar1 has UCS_BASIC collation. But if the 
> datatypes are comparable, then the result of concatenation will have 
> the collation type of the operands.
>
> I hope I covered it all. Looking forward to feedback,
> Mamta
>  
> On 3/19/07, *Daniel John Debrunner* <djd@apache.org 
> <mailto:djd@apache.org>> wrote:
>
>     Mamta Satoor wrote:
>     > Hi Dan,
>     >
>     > You asked about how collation will be set for character
>     expressions like
>     > string literal, cast to character type of a character
>     expression, trim,
>     > concationation etc.
>     >
>     > DTD will have an attribute called collation type and in 10.3, the
>     > possible values for it will be -1 meaning UNKNOWN collation, 0
>     meaning
>     > UCS_BASIC and 1 meaning TERRITORY_BASED. By default, DTD's will
>     have the
>     > collation type set to UNKNOWN. If the DTD is for a user table's CHAR
>     > column, then DTD's collation will be set to
>     TERRIOTRY_BASED/UCS_BASIC
>     > depending on what was requested at database create time in the
>     jdbc url.
>     > This setting of collation will be done by
>     DTD.setCollationType(int). If
>     > the DTD is for a SYS schema table's CHAR column, then  DTD's
>     collation
>     > will be set to UCS_BASIC.
>     >
>     > I think there is a DTD associated with all the character expressions
>     > like string literal, cast to character type of a character
>     expression,
>     > trim, concationation etc. And since the default collation type is
>     > UNKNOWN, these character expressions will have their collation
>     type as
>     > UNKNOWN until they actually get used in a collation method. When
>     they
>     > get used in a collation method, their collation type will be
>     determined
>     > by the context in which they are. ie if the other operand of the
>     > collation method has UCS_BASIC associated with them, then the
>     character
>     > expression's collation type in DTD will get set to UCS_BASIC and
>     similar
>     > logic if the other operand had TERRITORY_BASED collation type
>     associated
>     > with it.
>     >
>     > I hope this answers your question. I will include this
>     information on
>     > the wiki page for DERBY-1478 so that everything is tracked in one
>     > central location.
>
>     I'm not sure it's a simple as that. Consider this expression:
>
>       TRIM(x) < 'eee'
>
>     If x is a user column then I would expect the collation to be
>     performed
>     using the collation for user columns, but if x was a system column I
>     would expect it to be performed using UCS_BASIC. I think it would be
>     much like nullability, the nullability of some operation of x is
>     dependent on the nullability of x, hence the collation of some
>     operation
>     of x would be dependent on the collation of x.
>     Though of course, maybe the SQL standard defines it differently, it
>     would be good to know if it's defined by the standard or left as
>     implementation defined.
>
>     Dan.
>
>


Mime
View raw message