db-derby-user mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Rick Hillegas <Richard.Hille...@Sun.COM>
Subject Re: limitation in stored procedure names
Date Mon, 21 Apr 2008 18:08:49 GMT
Hi Nic,

The "." is used to separate identifiers in valid SQL names. For a schema 
object like a procedure, the name can have only one dot in it. The piece 
before the dot identifies a  unique schema in the database and the piece 
after the dot identifies a unique procedure name inside that schema. The 
compiler doesn't know what to do with the second dot. The compiler 
doesn't know if you are trying to create a procedure named 
or a procedure named "IPA_POST_AXIOSS_RESPONSE" in the 
"CUSTOM.IPA.POST_MESSAGE" schema or a procedure named 
double quote the whole name, then the compiler will not be confused:

"custom.ipa_post_message.ipa_post_axioss_response" ...

If you do this, then whenever you invoke the procedure, you must invoke 
it using the double quoted name. E.g.,:

CALL "custom.ipa_post_message.ipa_post_axioss_response" (...)

Hope this helps,

Hammonds, Nicholas wrote:
> I am using apache derby in my unit testing.  Consequently I need to
> create some stored procedures that will basically do the minimum and
> behave as expected.  Therefore I am restricted to using exactly the same
> parameters and name for my stored procedures.
> One such procedure I am trying to create is as follows
> stat = con.createStatement();
> stat.execute("CREATE PROCEDURE
> custom.ipa_post_message.ipa_post_axioss_response(IN pin_activity_id INT,
> IN pis_message_id INT, IN pis_response VARCHAR(50), IN pis_status
> VARCHAR(50), OUT pis_return VARCHAR(50)) parameter style java language
> java external name
> 'net.thus.unittest.DBHelper.storedProc_ipa_post_axioss_response'");
> It complains about a syntax error at the position of the second '.' .
> If I replace the second '.' with a '_' everything works fine.  As I say
> I have no influence of the procedure names is this DB is run and
> developed by a third party.  Anybody know of a fix/workaround for this?
> Many Thanks
> Nic

View raw message