[ 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DERBY-4259?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=13561829#comment-13561829
 ] 

Rick Hillegas commented on DERBY-4259:
--------------------------------------

Hi Kim,

Now that DERBY-5838 has been fixed, I think it's OK to document the 
DataDictionaryVersion property. I recommend considering the following points:

o The actual value of DataDictionaryVersion can be a little confusing, 
depending on whether the database has been soft-upgraded. The possible values 
of this property are discussed on DERBY-5818.

o I think it's worth mentioning that you can't change the value of this 
property. This diverges from the behavior of most other properties.

Thanks,
-Rick
                
> Provide public database property for determining database format version
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: DERBY-4259
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DERBY-4259
>             Project: Derby
>          Issue Type: Improvement
>          Components: Services
>    Affects Versions: 10.6.1.0
>            Reporter: Kathey Marsden
>            Priority: Minor
>
> It would be useful  to have a public interface for determining the database 
> format when running in soft upgrade mode.  In the derby-user thread:
> http://www.nabble.com/Hard-upgrade-failing--td23826558.html#a23835534
> Evan pointed out he was using an undocumented property 
> 'DataDictionaryVersion' for this purpose, but this is not ideal because it 
> does not conform to the normal derby.* naming convention  and is not 
> documented.
> Discussion in DERBY-4255 determined that there are not currently 
> DatabaseMetaData methods that achieve the same result.

--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
If you think it was sent incorrectly, please contact your JIRA administrators
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira

Reply via email to