[ http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DERBY-194?page=all ]
A B updated DERBY-194:
----------------------
Attachment: derby-194.stat
derby-194.patch
Attaching a patch for this issue.
Since the definitions of "precision" and "scale" aren't clearly defined for
datetime values in JDBC, I've set them based on the ODBC specification. It was
agreed in discussion of this issue (and also of DERBY-319) that the "intent" of
JDBC for these values is to mimic ODBC behavior. See the thread here for that
discussion:
http://article.gmane.org/gmane.comp.apache.db.derby.devel/2786
http://article.gmane.org/gmane.comp.apache.db.derby.devel/2787
> getPrecision() on TIME and TIMESTAMP is zero
> --------------------------------------------
>
> Key: DERBY-194
> URL: http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DERBY-194
> Project: Derby
> Type: Bug
> Components: JDBC
> Versions: 10.0.2.0
> Environment: Windows XP SP1 Professional
> Reporter: George Baklarz
> Assignee: A B
> Priority: Minor
> Attachments: derby-194.patch, derby-194.stat
>
> Sun JDBC defines getPrecision() to return either the maximum length or
> maximum number of digits of the column, or zero for failure (such as the
> precision is unknown).
> http://docs.sun.com/source/816-6105-10/apicola.htm#211083
> The DATE field returns 10 characters on a getPrecision() call so why doesn't
> TIME and TIMESTAMP give a precision length equal to the display length? Just
> seems inconsistent that DATE would return a precision (as well as all other
> data types) and not TIME nor TIMESTAMP.
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
If you think it was sent incorrectly contact one of the administrators:
http://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/Administrators.jspa
-
For more information on JIRA, see:
http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira
