[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DERBY-651?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=12783478#action_12783478
]
Dag H. Wanvik commented on DERBY-651:
-------------------------------------
Thanks, Rick. Thats for the comments on the two kinds of udts!
Changes look good, except for this small typo in Javadoc for
BaseTypeIdImpl(String schemaName, String unqualifiedName ):
* @param unqualifiedName The qualified name of the UDT in that schema
That should be "The unqualified name of the UDT in that schema", presumably.
> Re-enable the storing of java objects in the database
> -----------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: DERBY-651
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DERBY-651
> Project: Derby
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Components: SQL
> Reporter: Rick Hillegas
> Assignee: Rick Hillegas
> Attachments: derby-651-01-aa-basicCreateDropType.diff,
> derby-651-02-af-udtColumnsRetvalsParams.diff,
> derby-651-03-aa-udttestInstability.diff, derby-651-04-aa-javadoc.diff,
> UserDefinedTypes.html, UserDefinedTypes.html, UserDefinedTypes.html,
> UserDefinedTypes.html
>
>
> Islay Symonette, in an email thread called "Storing Java Objects in a table"
> on October 26, 2005 requests the ability to store java objects in the
> database.
> Old releases of Cloudscape allow users to declare a column's type to be a
> Serializable class. This feature was removed from Derby because the syntax
> was non-standard. However, most of the machinery to support objects
> serialized to columns is still in Derby and is even used in system tables. We
> need to agree on some standard syntax here and re-expose this useful feature.
> Some subset of the ANSI adt syntax, cumbersome as it is, would do.
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.
