Hi, Can the patch i proposed for this be accepted? I see no activity hapeening on this ( no comments apart from Amit's).
thanks Shreyas thanks Shreyas Amit Handa wrote: > Daniel John Debrunner wrote: > >>-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- >>Hash: SHA1 >> >>I think we need to reset on Derby-13, and also look at Derby-18 at the >>same time. I was confused over the exposed correlation name, thinking it >>had a schema, but it doesn't. >> >>A table in a list either has an exposed table name or an exposed >>correlation name. The correlation name is defined by the AS clause and >>can not have a schema. >> >>Thus with >> >>set current schema A >>select ... FROM T1, B.T2, T3 AS TC >> >>there should be three exposed names >> >>A.T1 as an exposed <table name> >>B.T2 as an exposed <table name> >>TC as an exposed <correlation name> >> >>The SQL standard rules are then (for table references in the same scope) >> >>1) No duplicates can exist among the exposed <table name>s >>2) No duplicates can exist among the exposed <correlation name>s >>3) Any <correlation name> must not be the same as the unqualifed part of >>any exposed <table name> >> >> >>One option in the code might be to have >> >>// Returns the exposed table name, >>// returns null if the table has a correlation name >>TableName getExposedTableName() >> >>// Returns the exposed correlation name, >>// returns null if the table does not have a correlation name >>String getExposedCorrelationName() >> >>Thus to keep the two concepts separate (since they are), rather than >>trying to shoehorn them into a single value (as the current code does). >>Then the duplicate checking would have to be smarter. >> > > > I get what you are saying. Note that we already have the above two methods > in a subclass of FromTable(FromVTI.java, getExposedName() and > getExposedTableName() ) > I am wondering was it intended to be that way i.e. to introduce the (above) > methods > in a subclass and not in base class. Is it by design ? > And if we go by what is suggested we may be breaking something else. > The subclasses will now over ride from FromTable.java insted fo FromVTI.java. > > But we can always give a shot at the proposed change. > Just my thoughts after looking at the issue. > > >>I think this would also enable the dubious null schema handling in >>TableName to be removed, as TableNames should always have a schema. >> >>Dan. >> >> >> >> >>-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- >>Version: GnuPG v1.2.5 (MingW32) >>Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org >> >>iD8DBQFB3E7SIv0S4qsbfuQRAkxJAKCZUIFXnm/+zsqO1MUnqqfMEyOPNQCg5gTa >>C/ri7UZzL80BtsaKM2gi59Y= >>=9aTO >>-----END PGP SIGNATURE----- >> > > > > > >
