db-derby-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Mamta Satoor" <msat...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Collation and parameter markers (?)
Date Tue, 05 Jun 2007 20:27:15 GMT
I realize that we are still discussing what should be the right collation
for different character string type instances, but I want to put out cases
which will hopefully aid in making a decision or expose different scenarios.

Consider following case for parameter with CAST.
select * from customer where CAST(? as char(10)) = name
The CAST node will assign the DTD associated with char(10) to the ?. But
what should be the collation type for char(10). Currently in the code, it is
UCS_BASIC and hence ? ends up getting UCS_BASIC. As a result, the result of
the CAST operand gets a collation type of UCS_BASIC amd the comparison
against "name" fails with compilation time error. Now doing a CAST on "name"
is not an option to fix this problem because CAST(name as char(10)) will
result in a character string type with collation of territory based. So, the
question is what should be the collation type of char(10) in the eg above?

thanks,
Mamta


On 6/5/07, Daniel John Debrunner <djd@apache.org> wrote:
>
> Mamta Satoor wrote:
> > Dan asked
> >
> ****************************************************************************************
> >   "8)JDBC parameters (ie. ?) where the type of the parameter is a
> > character type will have the same collation as of the character set of
> > the schema where the statement is prepared. The collation derivation
> > will be implicit."
> >
> > http://wiki.apache.org/db-derby/BuiltInLanguageBasedOrderingDERBY-1478
> >
> > This seems wrong to me, is there some section of the SQL standard that
> > is being followed?
> >
> ****************************************************************************************
> >
> > Dan, this came from the Collation feature discussion thread below.
> >
> http://www.nabble.com/Collation-feature-discussion-tf3418026.html#a9743522
> >
> > Basically, we followed SQL spec section 6.1 <data *type*> Syntax
> > Rule *3b* and 16.
>
> But that doesn't apply to a parameter marker. 6.1 is describing the
> syntax and behaviour of <data type>, when a type explicitly appears in
> the statement, e.g. INTEGER, CHAR(10). It is not discussing general
> behaviours of data types.
>
> Dan.
>

Mime
View raw message