db-derby-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Myrna van Lunteren" <m.v.lunte...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [jira] Commented: (DERBY-2245) DatabaseMetaData.getSQLKeywords() contains words that are not keywords in Derby.
Date Thu, 25 Oct 2007 02:45:55 GMT
On 10/24/07, Daniel John Debrunner (JIRA) <jira@apache.org> wrote:
>    [ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DERBY-2245?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel#action_12537469
> Daniel John Debrunner commented on DERBY-2245:
> ----------------------------------------------
> Does a keyword being reserved has anything to do with this method, the JDBC javadoc as
Knut Anders points out just says non-SQL 2003 keywords?
> In the list Myrna provides at least these are SQL 2003 keywords:
> The XML words are part of standard SQL, but maybe not SQL2003.
> I'm not sure though what the correct list should be, I can't figure out a use for this
method so it's hard to tell what it should do.
Thx for your input, Dan...

I've not tried to find a real JDBC spec yet, but the api doc (for
1.4.2) indicates this method needs to return keywords not part of
"Retrieves a comma-separated list of all of this database's SQL
keywords that are NOT also SQL92 keywords".
And, the plot thickens when one looks at the 1.6 api doc, which says:
"Retrieves a comma-separated list of all of this database's SQL
keywords that are NOT also SQL:2003 keywords"

Does that mean we are supposed to return something different with 1.6
than earlier versions?

I know we're not supposed to base ourselves on other products, but a
little googleing found a MySQL 5.0 bug that was fixed by making this
method return reserved non-sql92 keywords...Another website suggests
that 'keyword' implies a reserved word...Just saying that if we return
(of course non-sql) reserved words here, it's not unusual.

I am hoping someone with better knowledge of the JDBC spec can
indicate if this is supposed to be *reserved* keywords or not, or if
it's totally up to the implementation.

Also, I would like it if someone could explain what it means if a
keyword is in the 'reserved-Non-SQL 92' section of sqlgrammar.jj; I'm
wondering if some of those are maybe in the wrong place.


View raw message