[ http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DERBY-1358?page=comments#action_12414101 ]
Satheesh Bandaram commented on DERBY-1358: ------------------------------------------ I think conglomerateId was intended to be unique. Because of bug DERBY-1343, looks like there is a small chance of duplicates entries until Mamta fixed DERBY-655. Instead of changing documentation, may be a release note could be added. Looks like Mamta already submitted a patch for DERBY-655 to 10.1 branch, so 10.1.3 also will not have this problem for newly created tables. > Reference Manual incorrectly says that SYSCONGLOMERATES.CONGLOMERATEID is a > unique identifier for the conglomerate. > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Key: DERBY-1358 > URL: http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DERBY-1358 > Project: Derby > Type: Bug > Components: Documentation > Versions: 10.0.2.0, 10.1.1.0 > Reporter: Mamta A. Satoor > > CONGLOMERATEID is not a unique identifier for the SYSCONGLOMERATES and there > is no unique key defined SYSCONGLOMERATES.CONGLOMERATEID. Reference Manual -> > Derby System Tables -> SYCONGLOMERATES needs to be fixed to reflect that. > Related thread on this can be found at > http://www.nabble.com/-Derby-655-+%3A+getImportedKeys+returns+duplicate+rows+in+some+cases-t1673189.html#a4535887 > titled "[DERBY-655] : getImportedKeys returns duplicate rows in some cases". -- 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
