John Bodley created CALCITE-4367:
------------------------------------
Summary: Incorrect documentation for Avatica JSON request/response
signatures
Key: CALCITE-4367
URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CALCITE-4367
Project: Calcite
Issue Type: Bug
Components: avatica
Reporter: John Bodley
I noticed a few inconsistencies between what is documented in the [Avatica JSON
Reference|https://calcite.apache.org/avatica/docs/json_reference.html] and what
the Avatica JDBC driver provides, specifically:
# The {{DatabasePropertyRequest}} was missing the {{connection_id}} field in
the example signature.
# `RpcMetadata` is actually a response as opposed to a miscellaneous type per
[here|https://github.com/apache/calcite-avatica/blob/4b7eee5bf430b916c7c07897b6f60d2b6b6dabb7/core/src/main/protobuf/responses.proto#L114-L116]
and thus requires a {{response}} field. Note I'm not certain if this was
intentional, i.e., it being a response, however it it is it seems that it
should be renamed to {{RpcMetadataResponse}} for consistency.
# The supplied {{ConnectionProperties}} contains an undocumented {{dirty}}
field ({{is_dirty}} for protobuf).
# For the {{SchemasRequest}} the {{catalog}} and {{schemaPattern}} are optional
rather than required.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v8.3.4#803005)
