Hello.
Reading series of other mail "Running derbyall before submitting patches",
I'm very sorry for DERBY-318....
If possible , I want to work for DERBY-318 before DERBY-308 ....
Best regards.
/*
Tomohito Nakayama
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Naka
http://www5.ocn.ne.jp/~tomohito/TopPage.html
*/
----- Original Message -----
From: "Army" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Derby Development" <[email protected]>
Sent: Friday, May 27, 2005 1:56 AM
Subject: Re: DERBY-308 just be done and .... (Re: [jira] Updated:
(DERBY-308) Modify dblook to support "GENERATED BY DEFAULT AS IDENTITY")
TomohitoNakayama wrote:
Hello.
I have just done DERBY-308.
I uploaded patch just for reviewing.
Hi Tomohito,
Thanks for looking at this so quickly. A couple of comments on the patch:
First and most importanly:
It looks like you have run the dblook_test for embedded mode and have
updated the master, which is great. But I think the equivalent master
updates for the server tests are missing. In particular, I think it'd be
good to run the "derbynet/dblook_test_net.java" test against the Network
Server and update the master files accordingly. There are two masters,
one for the test with JCC and one for the test with the Derby Network
Client.
The reason I list this as "most importantly" is because when I myself
tried to run dblook_test_net against the server, I got a DRDA protocol
exception with the "GENERATED BY DEFAULT" column. I looked into this some
more and, after removing your patch, I was able to figure out that the
problem isn't with your DERBY-308 patch so much as with GENERATED BY
DEFAULT columns in general. I will file a separate JIRA defect for that
problem next--but in the meantime, I think this is a good example of why
we need to run tests against the server as much as possible.
My second (minor) comment on the patch is that it appears to contain
Japanese characters at the top of each file's diff. I think it's Japanese
for the words "revision" and "working copy". The patch still applies in
my codeline without problem, but I think it might be safer to try to
remove those characters from the patch before submitting, if that's
possible...?
I will file a JIRA entry for the DRDA protocol problem I mentioned above.
You may want to wait until that protocol issue can be resolved before
proceeding with this DERBY-308 patch...
Army
--
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
Version: 7.0.322 / Virus Database: 266.11.17 - Release Date: 2005/05/25
--
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
Version: 7.0.322 / Virus Database: 267.0.0 - Release Date: 2005/05/27
