Mike, the following code will be part of DataValueFactory and hence it will
be part of the interface. Please let me know if I am not very clear with
what I am proposing or if you forsee problems with this logic.
if (dvd instanceof StringDataValue)
dvd = dvd.getValue(dvf.getCharacterCollator(type));
Also, in the following line below
"I'll look at building/using DataFactory interface. It will be some"
you mean DataValueFactory interface, right?
Mamta
On 4/12/07, Mike Matrigali <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Mamta Satoor wrote:
> If we decide to provide static interface on DataValueFactory, then the
> Locale field and the RuleBasedCollator will need to be static too since
> we the static interfaces will need access to RuleBasedCollator. Because
> of this I am leaning more towards have non-static interface on DVF to
> get the correct DVD. I wonder if store in it's boot method can get the
> DataValueFactory with something like following
> DataValueFactory dvf = (DataValueFactory)
> Monitor.bootServiceModule(create,
> this, org.apache.derby.iapi.reference.ClassName.DataValueFactory,
> startParams);
> And then use this dvf to construct the DVD template row.
>
> As for the DTSClassInfo, the earlier discussion on this topic
> (
http://www.nabble.com/Collation-implementation-WAS-Re%3A-Should-COLLATION-attribute-related-code-go-in-BasicDatabase--p9496608.html
> <
http://www.nabble.com/Collation-implementation-WAS-Re%3A-Should-COLLATION-attribute-related-code-go-in-BasicDatabase--p9496608.html
>)
> was to first just get the DVD based on the format id and then check if
> dvd is instance of StringDataValue and if so, then call getValue on that
> dvd to get collation sensitive implementations of character DVD classes.
> I copied following from
>
http://www.nabble.com/Collation-implementation-WAS-Re%3A-Should-COLLATION-attribute-related-code-go-in-BasicDatabase--p9496608.html
> <
http://www.nabble.com/Collation-implementation-WAS-Re%3A-Should-COLLATION-attribute-related-code-go-in-BasicDatabase--p9496608.html
>
> if (dvd instanceof StringDataValue)
> dvd = dvd.getValue(dvf.getCharacterCollator(type));
I was working off the assumption from the following thread that
datavalue factory would provide the high level interface to get a dvd
based on format id and collate id. And if the work you describe above
is necessary it would be hidden behind the interface:
http://www.nabble.com/Should-COLLATION-attribute-related-code-go-in-BasicDatabase--tf3397113.html#a9583739
I'll look at building/using DataFactory interface. It will be some
additional overhead for straight path through store, but should be
minimal. Will need help in actual implementation of interface to
get right values - but I can submit an initial implementation that
just works for default collations first.
>
> BTW, I will add getCharacterCollator method on DVF when I am in there to
> add RuleBasedCollator field.
>
> Mamta
>
>
> On 4/11/07, *Mike Matrigali* <[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>> wrote:
>
>
>
> Mamta Satoor wrote:
> > Hi Mike,
> >
> > I think the code should go in iapi.types.DataValueFactory . DVF
has
> currently DataValueFactory is an interface. Do you have opinions
> about providing a static interface as is currently provided by
> the Monitor?
>
> > Locale of the database initialized on it by BasicDatabase using
> > setLocale method. I will go ahead and change that method to also
> > initialize a RuleBasedCollator field using the Locale field. This
> > RuleBasedCollator will be used to construct CollatorSQLChar and
> other
> > kinds of CollatorSQL... classes if the collation associated with
> format
> > id is not 0.
> >
> > Let me look at how actual objects are created using DTSClassInfo
> to see
> > how it might fit into the puzzle.
> the class is very straight forward, just take a look. just a
straight
> mapping of format ids to classes.
> >
> > thanks,
> > Mamta
> >
> > On 4/11/07, *Mike Matrigali* < [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>>> wrote:
> >
> > o The suggestion has been made to move the object creation
> > stuff from montior to data type code. Currently the
monitor
> > routines are called as static's off of a public
class. Should
> > I create a similar "datatype" owned class or just move the
> > code into the datatype factory and make store tote and pass
> > around a datatypefactory reference where it needs it.
> >
> > o In looking at implementation I see that actual objects get
> > allocated by DTSClassInfo.getNewInstance() which is just
> > based off of the format id. I am wondering if the proposal
> > is to change this behavior to something like
> > DTSClassInfo.getNewInstance (collation_id)?
> >
> >
>
>
