You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to derby-dev@db.apache.org by "Rick Hillegas (JIRA)" <de...@db.apache.org> on 2005/09/14 20:50:54 UTC
[jira] Created: (DERBY-570) wrong java.sql.Type id implied for LONG VARCHAR FOR BIT DATA
wrong java.sql.Type id implied for LONG VARCHAR FOR BIT DATA
------------------------------------------------------------
Key: DERBY-570
URL: http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DERBY-570
Project: Derby
Type: Bug
Components: Documentation
Versions: 10.1.1.0
Reporter: Rick Hillegas
The Datatypes section of the Reference Manual says that LONG VARCHAR FOR BIT DATA is identical to VARCHAR FOR BIT DATA but does not give a jdbc type, implying that LONG VARCHAR FOR BIT DATA has the same jdbc type as VARCHAR FOR BIT DATA, i.e., VARBINARY. This section should say that LONG VARCHAR FOR BIT DATA has the following jdbc type: LONGVARBINARY.
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
If you think it was sent incorrectly contact one of the administrators:
http://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/Administrators.jspa
-
For more information on JIRA, see:
http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira
[jira] Updated: (DERBY-570) wrong java.sql.Type id implied for LONG
VARCHAR FOR BIT DATA
Posted by "Eric Radzinski (JIRA)" <de...@db.apache.org>.
[ http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DERBY-570?page=all ]
Eric Radzinski updated DERBY-570:
---------------------------------
Attachment: derby570.diff
rrefsqlj30118.html
The attached patch adds the requested line ot the LONG VARCHAR FOR BIT DATA topic. HTML file is included for review.
> wrong java.sql.Type id implied for LONG VARCHAR FOR BIT DATA
> ------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: DERBY-570
> URL: http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DERBY-570
> Project: Derby
> Type: Bug
> Components: Documentation
> Versions: 10.1.1.0
> Reporter: Rick Hillegas
> Attachments: derby570.diff, rrefsqlj30118.html
>
> The Datatypes section of the Reference Manual says that LONG VARCHAR FOR BIT DATA is identical to VARCHAR FOR BIT DATA but does not give a jdbc type, implying that LONG VARCHAR FOR BIT DATA has the same jdbc type as VARCHAR FOR BIT DATA, i.e., VARBINARY. This section should say that LONG VARCHAR FOR BIT DATA has the following jdbc type: LONGVARBINARY.
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
If you think it was sent incorrectly contact one of the administrators:
http://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/Administrators.jspa
-
For more information on JIRA, see:
http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira
[jira] Updated: (DERBY-570) wrong java.sql.Type id implied for LONG
VARCHAR FOR BIT DATA
Posted by "Eric Radzinski (JIRA)" <de...@db.apache.org>.
[ http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DERBY-570?page=all ]
Eric Radzinski updated DERBY-570:
---------------------------------
Attachment: (was: rrefsqlj30118.html)
> wrong java.sql.Type id implied for LONG VARCHAR FOR BIT DATA
> ------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: DERBY-570
> URL: http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DERBY-570
> Project: Derby
> Type: Bug
> Components: Documentation
> Versions: 10.1.1.0
> Reporter: Rick Hillegas
> Attachments: derby570.diff
>
> The Datatypes section of the Reference Manual says that LONG VARCHAR FOR BIT DATA is identical to VARCHAR FOR BIT DATA but does not give a jdbc type, implying that LONG VARCHAR FOR BIT DATA has the same jdbc type as VARCHAR FOR BIT DATA, i.e., VARBINARY. This section should say that LONG VARCHAR FOR BIT DATA has the following jdbc type: LONGVARBINARY.
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
If you think it was sent incorrectly contact one of the administrators:
http://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/Administrators.jspa
-
For more information on JIRA, see:
http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira
[jira] Commented: (DERBY-570) wrong java.sql.Type id implied for
LONG VARCHAR FOR BIT DATA
Posted by "Daniel John Debrunner (JIRA)" <de...@db.apache.org>.
[ http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DERBY-570?page=comments#action_12365131 ]
Daniel John Debrunner commented on DERBY-570:
---------------------------------------------
Looks good. Thanks for working through this one.
> wrong java.sql.Type id implied for LONG VARCHAR FOR BIT DATA
> ------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: DERBY-570
> URL: http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DERBY-570
> Project: Derby
> Type: Bug
> Components: Documentation
> Versions: 10.1.1.0
> Reporter: Rick Hillegas
> Attachments: derby570-2.diff, derby570-3.diff, derby570.diff, rrefsqlj30118.html
>
> The Datatypes section of the Reference Manual says that LONG VARCHAR FOR BIT DATA is identical to VARCHAR FOR BIT DATA but does not give a jdbc type, implying that LONG VARCHAR FOR BIT DATA has the same jdbc type as VARCHAR FOR BIT DATA, i.e., VARBINARY. This section should say that LONG VARCHAR FOR BIT DATA has the following jdbc type: LONGVARBINARY.
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
If you think it was sent incorrectly contact one of the administrators:
http://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/Administrators.jspa
-
For more information on JIRA, see:
http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira
[jira] Resolved: (DERBY-570) wrong java.sql.Type id implied for
LONG VARCHAR FOR BIT DATA
Posted by "Jean T. Anderson (JIRA)" <de...@db.apache.org>.
[ http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DERBY-570?page=all ]
Jean T. Anderson resolved DERBY-570:
------------------------------------
Fix Version: 10.2.0.0
Resolution: Fixed
Committed Eric Radzinski's derby570-3.diff patch to the trunk, revision 375836. Modified files:
$ svn status
M src/ref/rrefsqlj30118.dita
> wrong java.sql.Type id implied for LONG VARCHAR FOR BIT DATA
> ------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: DERBY-570
> URL: http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DERBY-570
> Project: Derby
> Type: Bug
> Components: Documentation
> Versions: 10.1.1.0
> Reporter: Rick Hillegas
> Fix For: 10.2.0.0
> Attachments: derby570-2.diff, derby570-3.diff, derby570.diff, rrefsqlj30118.html
>
> The Datatypes section of the Reference Manual says that LONG VARCHAR FOR BIT DATA is identical to VARCHAR FOR BIT DATA but does not give a jdbc type, implying that LONG VARCHAR FOR BIT DATA has the same jdbc type as VARCHAR FOR BIT DATA, i.e., VARBINARY. This section should say that LONG VARCHAR FOR BIT DATA has the following jdbc type: LONGVARBINARY.
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
If you think it was sent incorrectly contact one of the administrators:
http://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/Administrators.jspa
-
For more information on JIRA, see:
http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira
[jira] Updated: (DERBY-570) wrong java.sql.Type id implied for LONG
VARCHAR FOR BIT DATA
Posted by "Eric Radzinski (JIRA)" <de...@db.apache.org>.
[ http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DERBY-570?page=all ]
Eric Radzinski updated DERBY-570:
---------------------------------
Attachment: derby570-2.diff
rrefsqlj30118.html
The newest patch and HTML file address Dan's suggestion.
I've reformatted the topic to match the other data type topics.
Also, the suggested compile time to use was "byte [ ]" All the other
data type topics used the fully-qualified name though, so I used
java.lang.Byte. Let me know if that's not correct.
> wrong java.sql.Type id implied for LONG VARCHAR FOR BIT DATA
> ------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: DERBY-570
> URL: http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DERBY-570
> Project: Derby
> Type: Bug
> Components: Documentation
> Versions: 10.1.1.0
> Reporter: Rick Hillegas
> Attachments: derby570-2.diff, derby570.diff, rrefsqlj30118.html
>
> The Datatypes section of the Reference Manual says that LONG VARCHAR FOR BIT DATA is identical to VARCHAR FOR BIT DATA but does not give a jdbc type, implying that LONG VARCHAR FOR BIT DATA has the same jdbc type as VARCHAR FOR BIT DATA, i.e., VARBINARY. This section should say that LONG VARCHAR FOR BIT DATA has the following jdbc type: LONGVARBINARY.
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
If you think it was sent incorrectly contact one of the administrators:
http://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/Administrators.jspa
-
For more information on JIRA, see:
http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira
[jira] Commented: (DERBY-570) wrong java.sql.Type id implied for
LONG VARCHAR FOR BIT DATA
Posted by "Daniel John Debrunner (JIRA)" <de...@db.apache.org>.
[ http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DERBY-570?page=comments#action_12365100 ]
Daniel John Debrunner commented on DERBY-570:
---------------------------------------------
I think the layout of the LONG VARCHAR FOR BIT DATA should match the other types, for example see LONG VARCHAR
http://db.apache.org/derby/docs/10.1/ref/rrefsqlj15147.html
See the syntax, Java type and JDBC type are sections with bold headings.
The compile time type for LONG VARCHAR FOR BIT DATA would be byte[]
> wrong java.sql.Type id implied for LONG VARCHAR FOR BIT DATA
> ------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: DERBY-570
> URL: http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DERBY-570
> Project: Derby
> Type: Bug
> Components: Documentation
> Versions: 10.1.1.0
> Reporter: Rick Hillegas
> Attachments: derby570.diff, rrefsqlj30118.html
>
> The Datatypes section of the Reference Manual says that LONG VARCHAR FOR BIT DATA is identical to VARCHAR FOR BIT DATA but does not give a jdbc type, implying that LONG VARCHAR FOR BIT DATA has the same jdbc type as VARCHAR FOR BIT DATA, i.e., VARBINARY. This section should say that LONG VARCHAR FOR BIT DATA has the following jdbc type: LONGVARBINARY.
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
If you think it was sent incorrectly contact one of the administrators:
http://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/Administrators.jspa
-
For more information on JIRA, see:
http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira
[jira] Commented: (DERBY-570) wrong java.sql.Type id implied for
LONG VARCHAR FOR BIT DATA
Posted by "Daniel John Debrunner (JIRA)" <de...@db.apache.org>.
[ http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DERBY-570?page=comments#action_12365118 ]
Daniel John Debrunner commented on DERBY-570:
---------------------------------------------
No java.lang.Byte is wrong.
I was going to say look at VARCHAR FOR BIT DATA, but it doesn't have a compile type section.
I would match VARCHAR FOR BIT DATA and CHAR FOR BIT data by not having a compile time type.
I actually think we could remove the compile time java types for all the data types, I have no idea
what it is meant to mean. Mappings between SQL types and Java types should be covered elsewhere.
That's probably a separate cleanup though.
> wrong java.sql.Type id implied for LONG VARCHAR FOR BIT DATA
> ------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: DERBY-570
> URL: http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DERBY-570
> Project: Derby
> Type: Bug
> Components: Documentation
> Versions: 10.1.1.0
> Reporter: Rick Hillegas
> Attachments: derby570-2.diff, derby570.diff, rrefsqlj30118.html
>
> The Datatypes section of the Reference Manual says that LONG VARCHAR FOR BIT DATA is identical to VARCHAR FOR BIT DATA but does not give a jdbc type, implying that LONG VARCHAR FOR BIT DATA has the same jdbc type as VARCHAR FOR BIT DATA, i.e., VARBINARY. This section should say that LONG VARCHAR FOR BIT DATA has the following jdbc type: LONGVARBINARY.
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
If you think it was sent incorrectly contact one of the administrators:
http://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/Administrators.jspa
-
For more information on JIRA, see:
http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira
[jira] Updated: (DERBY-570) wrong java.sql.Type id implied for LONG
VARCHAR FOR BIT DATA
Posted by "Eric Radzinski (JIRA)" <de...@db.apache.org>.
[ http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DERBY-570?page=all ]
Eric Radzinski updated DERBY-570:
---------------------------------
Attachment: (was: rrefsqlj30118.html)
> wrong java.sql.Type id implied for LONG VARCHAR FOR BIT DATA
> ------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: DERBY-570
> URL: http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DERBY-570
> Project: Derby
> Type: Bug
> Components: Documentation
> Versions: 10.1.1.0
> Reporter: Rick Hillegas
> Attachments: derby570-2.diff, derby570.diff
>
> The Datatypes section of the Reference Manual says that LONG VARCHAR FOR BIT DATA is identical to VARCHAR FOR BIT DATA but does not give a jdbc type, implying that LONG VARCHAR FOR BIT DATA has the same jdbc type as VARCHAR FOR BIT DATA, i.e., VARBINARY. This section should say that LONG VARCHAR FOR BIT DATA has the following jdbc type: LONGVARBINARY.
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
If you think it was sent incorrectly contact one of the administrators:
http://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/Administrators.jspa
-
For more information on JIRA, see:
http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira
[jira] Closed: (DERBY-570) wrong java.sql.Type id implied for LONG
VARCHAR FOR BIT DATA
Posted by "Jean T. Anderson (JIRA)" <de...@db.apache.org>.
[ http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DERBY-570?page=all ]
Jean T. Anderson closed DERBY-570:
----------------------------------
No problems have been reported with the patch that was committed, so closing.
> wrong java.sql.Type id implied for LONG VARCHAR FOR BIT DATA
> ------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: DERBY-570
> URL: http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DERBY-570
> Project: Derby
> Type: Bug
> Components: Documentation
> Versions: 10.1.1.0
> Reporter: Rick Hillegas
> Fix For: 10.2.0.0
> Attachments: derby570-2.diff, derby570-3.diff, derby570.diff, rrefsqlj30118.html
>
> The Datatypes section of the Reference Manual says that LONG VARCHAR FOR BIT DATA is identical to VARCHAR FOR BIT DATA but does not give a jdbc type, implying that LONG VARCHAR FOR BIT DATA has the same jdbc type as VARCHAR FOR BIT DATA, i.e., VARBINARY. This section should say that LONG VARCHAR FOR BIT DATA has the following jdbc type: LONGVARBINARY.
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
If you think it was sent incorrectly contact one of the administrators:
http://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/Administrators.jspa
-
For more information on JIRA, see:
http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira
[jira] Updated: (DERBY-570) wrong java.sql.Type id implied for LONG
VARCHAR FOR BIT DATA
Posted by "Eric Radzinski (JIRA)" <de...@db.apache.org>.
[ http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DERBY-570?page=all ]
Eric Radzinski updated DERBY-570:
---------------------------------
Attachment: rrefsqlj30118.html
derby570-3.diff
derby570-3.diff removes the compile time type section from the topic. Latest HTML file is included for review.
> wrong java.sql.Type id implied for LONG VARCHAR FOR BIT DATA
> ------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: DERBY-570
> URL: http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DERBY-570
> Project: Derby
> Type: Bug
> Components: Documentation
> Versions: 10.1.1.0
> Reporter: Rick Hillegas
> Attachments: derby570-2.diff, derby570-3.diff, derby570.diff, rrefsqlj30118.html
>
> The Datatypes section of the Reference Manual says that LONG VARCHAR FOR BIT DATA is identical to VARCHAR FOR BIT DATA but does not give a jdbc type, implying that LONG VARCHAR FOR BIT DATA has the same jdbc type as VARCHAR FOR BIT DATA, i.e., VARBINARY. This section should say that LONG VARCHAR FOR BIT DATA has the following jdbc type: LONGVARBINARY.
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
If you think it was sent incorrectly contact one of the administrators:
http://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/Administrators.jspa
-
For more information on JIRA, see:
http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira