I thought Rick's suggestion of adding the "UNSIGNED" keyword was a good
solution -- we can get the best of both worlds...
David
Francois Orsini wrote:
Since Sybase, MySQL and MS SQL Server have had support for UNSIGNED
TINYINT for many years (at least for 2 of them), offering support for an
UNSIGNED TINYINT rather than SIGNED at this point makes more sense and
can only be good for Derby's adoption (and that a sufficient reason for
adding it IMHO) (SIGNED TINYINT could always be enabled later _if_
required but JDBC does not require the type to be signed in the first
place) - it brings value for getting Derby more adopted from users
looking to migrate from other known and popular RDBMS (not just from the
ones which got most market shares)...and as far as the footprint as
previously mentioned, it is good to offer support for a 1-Byte datatype
which does matter indeed when running in a small-device environment.
--francois
begin:vcard
fn:David W Van Couvering
n:Van Couvering;David W
org:Sun Microsystems, Inc.;Database Technology Group
email;internet:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
title:Senior Staff Software Engineer
tel;work:510-550-6819
tel;cell:510-684-7281
x-mozilla-html:TRUE
version:2.1
end:vcard
