[ http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DERBY-570?page=comments#action_12365100 ]
Daniel John Debrunner commented on DERBY-570: --------------------------------------------- I think the layout of the LONG VARCHAR FOR BIT DATA should match the other types, for example see LONG VARCHAR http://db.apache.org/derby/docs/10.1/ref/rrefsqlj15147.html See the syntax, Java type and JDBC type are sections with bold headings. The compile time type for LONG VARCHAR FOR BIT DATA would be byte[] > wrong java.sql.Type id implied for LONG VARCHAR FOR BIT DATA > ------------------------------------------------------------ > > Key: DERBY-570 > URL: http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DERBY-570 > Project: Derby > Type: Bug > Components: Documentation > Versions: 10.1.1.0 > Reporter: Rick Hillegas > Attachments: derby570.diff, rrefsqlj30118.html > > The Datatypes section of the Reference Manual says that LONG VARCHAR FOR BIT > DATA is identical to VARCHAR FOR BIT DATA but does not give a jdbc type, > implying that LONG VARCHAR FOR BIT DATA has the same jdbc type as VARCHAR FOR > BIT DATA, i.e., VARBINARY. This section should say that LONG VARCHAR FOR BIT > DATA has the following jdbc type: LONGVARBINARY. -- 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
