[ http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DERBY-1094?page=comments#action_12375902 ]
Knut Anders Hatlen commented on DERBY-1094: ------------------------------------------- The patch looks good to me, but I have one question. The comment in metadata.properties says "New name so that it will get picked up during soft upgrade." whereas the comment in EmbedDatabaseMetaData.java says "The query was given a new name to allow the old query to be used by ODBCMetaDataGenerator." Are both of these comments correct? If so, what's the issue with soft upgrade? > 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, derby-1094.v1.diff, > derby-1094.v1.stat, derbyall_report.v1.txt > > 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
