[ http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DERBY-1094?page=comments#action_12371106 ]
Dyre Tjeldvoll commented on DERBY-1094: --------------------------------------- Sigh, I give up. I'm sure you're right. Does this mean that JDBC 3.0 assumes SQL_ATTR_ODBC_VERSION=SQL_OV_ODBC2, then? And what about JDBC 4.0? Does it assume SQL_OV_ODBC2 also? And yes, you are right DECIMAL_DIGITS can be zero. But why is it 6 for TIMESTAMP, and 0 for TIME? I'm sure it is legal, but does it make sense to have a TIME data type that cannot have fractional seconds? Especially when your TIMESTAMP type can...? But I guess that's the way it is (and have always been), then. > Make DatabaseMetaData.getProcedureColumns() JDBC4 compliant > ----------------------------------------------------------- > > Key: DERBY-1094 > URL: http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DERBY-1094 > Project: Derby > Type: Sub-task > Components: JDBC > Versions: 10.2.0.0 > Reporter: Dyre Tjeldvoll > Assignee: Dyre Tjeldvoll > Fix For: 10.2.0.0 > Attachments: derby-1094.preliminary.diff > > The result set returned by getProcedureColumns() must be extended with 7 > additional columns in JDBC 4.0; COLUMN_DEF, SQL_DATA_TYPE, SQL_DATETIME_SUB, > CHAR_OCTET_LENGTH, ORDINAL_POSITION, IS_NULLABLE and SPECIFIC_NAME. The > returned result set should be ordered by PROCEDURE_SCHEMA, PROCEDURE_NAME and > SPECIFIC_NAME -- 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
