db-torque-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Thomas Fischer <tfisc...@apache.org>
Subject Need some more opinions on TORQUE-44
Date Sat, 30 Sep 2006 06:54:31 GMT
The problem addressed in

http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TORQUE-44

was that in java generation, the constants for Column names are generated 
in upper case, while in sql generation, case is preserved. So there 
is a msismatch between those two. This usually does not matter, as sql 
standard says that column name mathcing should be case-insensitive, but as 
usual, there are some databases which do not keep to the standard (in 
this case sybase)

So Thoralf went ahead and submitted a patch, and I committed it. However, 
if you change now from Torque 3.2 to 3.2.1-dev, the constants for the 
column names in generated java code change. So if one has stored these 
constants in some other place (like a database) in an application, any 
comparisons between the constants and the stored column names will not 
produce the same results as before, causing the application to fail. Greg 
ran into this problem in an application of his, so this concern is not far 
fetched.

The question is now whether we want to make this change in a minor release 
or not. So far, everybody has agreed that this was a bug when it was coded 
this way, but Greg's argument was that this behaviour has become a 
standard in some sense.

My personal opinion is +0.1 for changing the constants to preserve 
case, because it is not a big change and does not affect the "usual" 
Torque use cases. If we can not make such a small change, we would be 
reduced to nothing but fixing things which are obvious bugs between 
smaller releases.

I am aware that the best possible approach would be to use a svn branch 
for fixing obvious bugs, and another for stuff which might break anything, 
but this would need a lot of effort in merging and I do not see this to be 
justified (I know what I'm talking about here, having merged the 
3.1.1-branch and the 3,2-dev branch, and in some cases it was just 
praying that it woukld work out all right)

So please give your opinions whether we want to keep this change in the 
3.2.1 release or whether we should wait for a major release to put this 
in.

    Thomas






---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: torque-dev-unsubscribe@db.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: torque-dev-help@db.apache.org


Mime
View raw message