TomohitoNakayama <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Hello Knut. > > By the way, I want to figure it out what is the actual range of > modification in DERBY-1610. > > Knut Anders Hatlen commented on DERBY-1610: >>Therefore, I think that it is better to fix all of them at once. > > What is "all of them" here ? > > Just setBlob and setBinaryStream ? > Or whole case of parameterMapping.java ?
I was thinking about all the setter methods. I think we only need a method in am/PreparedStatement which checks whether a given type is compatible with the type of the parameter, and a call to that method in PreparedStatement.checkSetterPreconditions(). > Too high goal may block other task, > then reasonable goal should be established. Good point! If we use a generic approach to begin with, we could add checks for a subset of the types and increase incrementally. I think that if we do it for setBinaryStream() we should also do it for setBlob() and setBytes() in the same run. Next (in a separate patch), we could do the same for setAsciiStream(), setCharacterStream() and setString(). Then we fix all the scalar setters (setInt, setFloat & co.), and finally date, time and timestamp. > I think it is needed to analyze current difference of > parameterMapping.out between Embedded and Network Client in order to > consider the goal... Sounds like a good idea. -- Knut Anders
