Daniel John Debrunner wrote: Well that is good to know... 8-)Lance J. Andersen wrote:With 1501 the JDBC spec says the type must be known (I think it's a bug in the *draft* spec for the type to be ignored), that's the portable behaviour, ignoring the type not only leads to non-portable applications but also inconsistencies in derby. E.g. a NULL defined as a DATE could used for a BLOB value through JDBC, but not using SQL.Can u help me here as to what it the bug you are referring to? too many emails today to see the forest through the trees.DERBY-1501http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DERBY-1501 You're already on the case. :-) Dan. |
- Re: Not forgiving non-portable applications - Was: R... Daniel John Debrunner
- Re: Not forgiving non-portable applications - W... Lance J. Andersen