db-derby-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Daniel John Debrunner (JIRA)" <j...@apache.org>
Subject [jira] Commented: (DERBY-716) Re-enable VTIs
Date Sat, 14 Apr 2007 01:02:15 GMT

    [ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DERBY-716?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel#action_12488829
] 

Daniel John Debrunner commented on DERBY-716:
---------------------------------------------

Using ResultSet as the api to implement table functions can be somewhat awkward. When this
VTI functionality was implemented in Cloudscape, ResultSet's were somewhat simple, forward
only, read-only and only JDBC 1.2. Now ResultSet's need to support updates, deletes, inserts
and scrolling. This means that even a simple table function must implement a large number
of methods even if (I think) in the simplest case only four may be required (constructor,
next, getXXX and close). While one can try to create a template that has most of the non-required
methods (as Cloudscape did), this becomes a major pain if one needs to support multiple JDBC
environments, JDBC 3, 4 and JSR 169. In fact using ResultSet means that the application developer
will have a hard time implementing a solution in a JDBC version agnostic way.
Also using ResultSet means that the application developer ends up implementing a class that
doesn't really implement the defined contract of ResultSet, just the subset specific to Derby's
functional tables, doesn't seem to be a ideal postion to be in for an app developer.

I've been struggling with these issues while looking at the way Derby uses VTIs (ResultSets)
for triggers, currently the implementation uses classes that are not in JSR169 but needs to
because the code is compiled against JDBC 3. It just seems to work, but may fail on some J2ME
VM's that have stricter class loading policies.

Contrast this with the standard mechanism for writing table functions in Java that just use
a single static Java method, much easier for an application developer to work with, portable
to multiple JDBC versions and easier to understand (a single working method rather than 139
methods (in JDBC 3) and most of them not used).

While the current Derby internal vti is quite powerful the SQL standard provides for much
of the same functionality  through SQL/MED, e.g. pushing predicates, providing optimizer costs
etc.

Thus I have reservations about introducing a non-standard feature into Derby and especially
a non-standard feature that exposes a un-friendly api onto the application developer.

I do think that Java table functions or wrappers (for updates as well) would be a great addition
to Derby, I just think that the api should be clean and easy especially if it's not standard
based.

I also have some questions on the details in the spec if the ResultSet approach is taken,
but here's one on the SQL. Why is the SQL for SELECT changing? Derby already supports bultin
table functions, so what needs to change here?



> Re-enable VTIs
> --------------
>
>                 Key: DERBY-716
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DERBY-716
>             Project: Derby
>          Issue Type: New Feature
>          Components: SQL
>            Reporter: Rick Hillegas
>         Attachments: functionTables.html
>
>
> Cloudscape used to expose Virtual Table Interfaces, by which any class which implemented
ResultSet could be included in a query's FROM list. Derby still exposes a number of these
VTIs as diagnostic tools. However, Derby now prevents customers from declaring their own VTIs.
The parser raises an error if a VTI's package isn't one of the Derby diagnostic packages.
> This is a very powerful feature which customers can use to solve many problems. We should
discuss the reasons that it was disabled and come up with a plan for putting this power back
into our customers' hands.

-- 
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.


Mime
View raw message