On 2017-05-16 21:19, Dmitry Yemanov wrote: > 16.05.2017 22:14, Mark Rotteveel wrote: > >> A bug was just reported for Jaybird 3 >> (http://tracker.firebirdsql.org/browse/JDBC-494); I made changes to >> use >> RDB$RELATION_TYPE to discriminate between the different relation >> types, >> but apparently it can be null under some conditions. >> >> What are those conditions, or would this be a bug in Firebird if it is >> null? > > Perhaps a restore from some ancient version could leave this field > being > NULL. The engine treats NULL as 0 (aka PERSISTENT), so it shouldn't > hurt.
But it does hurt if you have a condition: "where rdb$relation_type = 0" (or in this case: "where rdb$relation_type in (0, 3)"; shouldn't the restore fix this up and make NULL explicit 0? Mark ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot Firebird-Devel mailing list, web interface at https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/firebird-devel
