Mailing-List: contact derby-dev-help@db.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: <derby-dev@db.apache.org>
Message-ID: <855364963.102971265508628206.JavaMail.jira@brutus.apache.org>
Date: Sun, 7 Feb 2010 02:10:28 +0000 (UTC)
From: "Rick Hillegas (JIRA)" <jira@apache.org>
To: derby-dev@db.apache.org
Subject: [jira] Updated: (DERBY-4513) Forbid NEXT VALUE FOR clause in
 certain contexts
In-Reply-To: <348044516.187021263321354557.JavaMail.jira@brutus.apache.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit


     [ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DERBY-4513?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel ]

Rick Hillegas updated DERBY-4513:
---------------------------------

    Issue & fix info: [Patch Available]

> Forbid NEXT VALUE FOR clause in certain contexts
> ------------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: DERBY-4513
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DERBY-4513
>             Project: Derby
>          Issue Type: Bug
>          Components: SQL
>    Affects Versions: 10.6.0.0
>            Reporter: Rick Hillegas
>            Assignee: Rick Hillegas
>         Attachments: derby-4513_01-aa-illegalContexts.diff
>
>
> This is part of the work needed to implement ANSI/ISO sequences. The functional spec attached to DERBY-712 lists various situations in which the NEXT VALUE FOR clause is illegal. These include:
>     * CASE expression
>     * WHERE clause
>     * ORDER BY clause
>     * AGGREGATE expression
>     * WINDOW function
>     * DISTINCT select list
> In addition, I propose that we make it illegal for a statement to have more than one NEXT VALUE FOR clause on the same sequence generator. This is a tighter restriction than the ANSI/ISO standard calls for. The standard requires that if two columns in a row are populated by NEXT VALUE FOR clauses on the same sequence, then the values should be the same. I don't feel confident that I could track down all of the cases which could give rise to this situation--so I propose to limit the number of NEXT VALUE FOR clauses on a given sequence generator to just 1.

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