db-derby-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Dag H. Wanvik (JIRA)" <j...@apache.org>
Subject [jira] Commented: (DERBY-651) Re-enable the storing of java objects in the database
Date Sat, 28 Nov 2009 02:45:20 GMT

    [ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DERBY-651?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=12783201#action_12783201

Dag H. Wanvik commented on DERBY-651:

Thanks for this patch, Rick. Nice to see this addition!  It was pretty
straight-forward to grok, although as always the changes in the type
classes challenge me. The general approach seems fine. I have only
nits which may have escaped your attention to contribute for now.
You may want to assign yourself now that you have made two nice patches :)

- Clarify somewhere difference between Derby User defined types and
  (actual user created) UDTs; usage is a bit confusing now, you do use
  the term UserDefinedTypeIdImpl for UDTs...

- Many lines > 80

* UserDefinedTypeIdImpl#isBound:
- lacks proper javadoc @return tag (more methods do too)
- simplify return !(className == null) -> 
  return className != null

* TypeDescriptor#isUserDefinedType:
- lacks proper javadoc @return tag

* BaseTypeIdImpl#getSchemaName, getUnqualifiedName: lack proper javadoc
  @return tag

* TypeDescriptorImpl#isUserDefinedType: Javadoc: suggest {@inheritDoc}
  instead of @see
  isBound: lacks proper javadoc @return tag

* TypeId#getUserDefinedTypeId lacks all javadoc tags

* ColumnDefinitionNode.java: spurious blank lines introduced

* UserType.java: would be nice to see docs describing difference between
  setValue, setObject. Both have an Object parameter...

* QueryTreeNode#bindUserType: lacks all javadoc tags

> Re-enable the storing of java objects in the database
> -----------------------------------------------------
>                 Key: DERBY-651
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DERBY-651
>             Project: Derby
>          Issue Type: Improvement
>          Components: SQL
>            Reporter: Rick Hillegas
>         Attachments: derby-651-01-aa-basicCreateDropType.diff, derby-651-02-af-udtColumnsRetvalsParams.diff,
UserDefinedTypes.html, UserDefinedTypes.html, UserDefinedTypes.html, UserDefinedTypes.html
> Islay Symonette, in an email thread called "Storing Java Objects in a table" on October
26, 2005 requests the ability to store java objects in the database.
> Old releases of Cloudscape allow users to declare a column's type to be a Serializable
class. This feature was removed from Derby because the syntax was non-standard. However, most
of the machinery to support objects serialized to columns is still in Derby and is even used
in system tables. We need to agree on some standard syntax here and re-expose this useful
feature. Some subset of the ANSI adt syntax, cumbersome as it is, would do.

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

View raw message