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 "Jørgen Løland (JIRA)" <ji...@apache.org> on 2007/05/04 14:32:15 UTC
[jira] Updated: (DERBY-1828) Access rule violations should use a
SQL state starting with '42' according to the SQL standard.
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DERBY-1828?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel ]
Jørgen Løland updated DERBY-1828:
---------------------------------
Attachment: DERBY-1828-2.stat
DERBY-1828-2.diff
Patch (2) supersedes (1). The patch moves all 2850x error codes except 28502 to 4250x or 08004 (if the exception is thrown during connect). 04501 is also moved to 08004. A whole lot of tests have been modified to expect the new codes.
The patch passes allsuites, but fails bootLock in derbyall (which is normal here. Will have to fix it...).
Myrna (in "opinions please on possible existing app impact of DERBY-1828"):
> Hi,
> In DERBY-1828, Jørgen proposes to adjust some SQLStates in the
> authorization area.
> I'd like the community's input on the release-related question:
> Jørgen asks:
> "Q1) I need your opinion on whether or not this issue can be fixed
> before the next major release. I.e., may new error codes cause
> problems for existing applications?"
Thanks for addressing this, Myrna. If there are no objections before Wed May 9, 2:00 PM CET, I will mark "Patch available" for patch (2).
> Access rule violations should use a SQL state starting with '42' according to the SQL standard.
> -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: DERBY-1828
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DERBY-1828
> Project: Derby
> Issue Type: Bug
> Components: JDBC
> Affects Versions: 10.2.1.6, 10.3.0.0
> Reporter: Daniel John Debrunner
> Assigned To: Jørgen Løland
> Attachments: DERBY-1828-1.diff, DERBY-1828-1.stat, DERBY-1828-2.diff, DERBY-1828-2.stat
>
>
> The SQL standard says that SQL State '42' is for "syntax error or access
> rule violation" (section 23.1).
> There is a question of what JDBC 4.0 exception should be thrown for a access rule violation,
> JDBC 4.0 maps '42' to SQLSyntaxErrorException which seems wrong for an access rule.
> Message thread:
> http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/db-derby-dev/200609.mbox/%3c45004A04.5080002@apache.org%3e
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.