derby/db2: why separate?

[Henri Yandell <fl...@gmail.com>]

One thing I recall from the talk on Derby at ApacheCon was that its
SQL dialect was compatible with DB2. Looking at our createdb.sql, I
see only two differences between our derby and db2 ones:

<     pubtime         timestamp,
---
>     pubtime         timestamp null,


and a fair number of:

<     foreign key ( userid ) references rolleruser ( id )  ;
---
>     foreign key ( userid ) references rolleruser ( id ) on delete no action on update no action enforced enable query optimization ;


The latter seems likely that it could just be the same [indeed the
latter part looks like they're probably defaults, but I have no clue
about db2].

Could we be using the same dbscript for each?

Hen

Re: derby/db2: why separate?

[Elias Torres <el...@torrez.us>]

Henri,

I don't see why not we should try to use one script for both. I'll do
some testing and report back.

-Elias

On 12/29/05, Henri Yandell <fl...@gmail.com> wrote:
> One thing I recall from the talk on Derby at ApacheCon was that its
> SQL dialect was compatible with DB2. Looking at our createdb.sql, I
> see only two differences between our derby and db2 ones:
>
> <     pubtime         timestamp,
> ---
> >     pubtime         timestamp null,
>
>
> and a fair number of:
>
> <     foreign key ( userid ) references rolleruser ( id )  ;
> ---
> >     foreign key ( userid ) references rolleruser ( id ) on delete no action on update no action enforced enable query optimization ;
>
>
> The latter seems likely that it could just be the same [indeed the
> latter part looks like they're probably defaults, but I have no clue
> about db2].
>
> Could we be using the same dbscript for each?
>
> Hen
>