[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DERBY-4259?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=13540382#comment-13540382
]
Knut Anders Hatlen commented on DERBY-4259:
-------------------------------------------
In DERBY-5818 it was suggested that simply documenting DataDictionaryVersion
would be a fine start. Documenting a property that follows a non-standard
naming convention probably doesn't add a lot more entropy than adding a new
property with the same function would.
> Provide public database property for determining database format version
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: DERBY-4259
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DERBY-4259
> Project: Derby
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Components: Services
> Affects Versions: 10.6.1.0
> Reporter: Kathey Marsden
> Priority: Minor
>
> It would be useful to have a public interface for determining the database
> format when running in soft upgrade mode. In the derby-user thread:
> http://www.nabble.com/Hard-upgrade-failing--td23826558.html#a23835534
> Evan pointed out he was using an undocumented property
> 'DataDictionaryVersion' for this purpose, but this is not ideal because it
> does not conform to the normal derby.* naming convention and is not
> documented.
> Discussion in DERBY-4255 determined that there are not currently
> DatabaseMetaData methods that achieve the same result.
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
If you think it was sent incorrectly, please contact your JIRA administrators
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira
