db-derby-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Rick Hillegas (JIRA)" <j...@apache.org>
Subject [jira] [Commented] (DERBY-4259) Document database property for determining database format version
Date Fri, 25 Jan 2013 14:07:14 GMT

    [ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DERBY-4259?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=13562700#comment-13562700
] 

Rick Hillegas commented on DERBY-4259:
--------------------------------------

Thanks, Kim. This looks good. I recommend adding some more verbiage to punch up the fact that
this is the rev level of the data on disk, not the rev level of the Derby jar files. 

rrefproperdatadictversion

I would re-word the first paragraph slightly:

"Shows the version of the on-disk data in the database. This is the first two (major and minor)
numbers in a Derby release identifier. For newly created databases, this is the release identifier
of the Derby engine jar used to create the database. For hard-upgraded databases, this is
the release identifier of the Derby engine jar used to hard-upgrade the database."

Thanks,
-Rick
                
> Document database property for determining database format version
> ------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: DERBY-4259
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DERBY-4259
>             Project: Derby
>          Issue Type: Improvement
>          Components: Documentation
>    Affects Versions: 10.6.1.0
>            Reporter: Kathey Marsden
>            Assignee: Kim Haase
>            Priority: Minor
>         Attachments: DERBY-4259.diff, DERBY-4259.stat, DERBY-4259.zip
>
>
> It would be useful  to have a public interface for determining the database format when
running in soft upgrade mode.  In the derby-user thread:
> http://www.nabble.com/Hard-upgrade-failing--td23826558.html#a23835534
> Evan pointed out he was using an undocumented property 'DataDictionaryVersion' for this
purpose, but this is not ideal because it does not conform to the normal derby.* naming convention
 and is not documented.
> Discussion in DERBY-4255 determined that there are not currently DatabaseMetaData methods
that achieve the same result.

--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
If you think it was sent incorrectly, please contact your JIRA administrators
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira

Mime
View raw message