[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DERBY-4259?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=13561811#comment-13561811
]
Kim Haase commented on DERBY-4259:
----------------------------------
Would it make sense to convert this issue to a doc issue for documenting the
DataDictionaryVersion property? If so, I can do this and pick up the task. I
gather it doesn't conform to the usual property naming convention
("derby.xxx.propertyName").
Alternately, I can create a new issue for the documentation and leave this one
as is.
> 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
