db-derby-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Tomohito Nakayama (JIRA)" <j...@apache.org>
Subject [jira] Commented: (DERBY-1942) There exists difference between behavior of setNull(Types.TIME) and setTiime(null).
Date Thu, 07 Jun 2007 11:33:32 GMT

    [ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DERBY-1942?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel#action_12502306
] 

Tomohito Nakayama commented on DERBY-1942:
------------------------------------------

Thank you for brushing up the note :)

I think contents of Application Changes Required section was changed a little bit.
I read the description that TIME data type is completely impossible to use.
In the truth, application is not prohibitted from using TIME data type if it was appropriate.

I'm thinking to modify as next :
It is needed to correct inappropriate use of TIME data type to use the TIMESTAMP data type
insteadly.


> There exists difference between behavior of  setNull(Types.TIME) and setTiime(null).
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: DERBY-1942
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DERBY-1942
>             Project: Derby
>          Issue Type: Bug
>          Components: JDBC
>            Reporter: Tomohito Nakayama
>            Assignee: Tomohito Nakayama
>             Fix For: 10.3.0.0
>
>         Attachments: DERBY-1942.patch, releaseNote.html, releaseNote_reviewed.html
>
>
> The result of setNull(java.sql.Types.TIME) for TIMESTAMP typed variable is regarded as
error.
> However, the result of setTime(null) for TIMESTAMP typed variable is not regarded as
error . 
> see http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DERBY-1610#action_12436554

-- 
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