[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CALCITE-4367?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Josh Elser reassigned CALCITE-4367:
-----------------------------------
Assignee: Josh Elser
> 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
> Assignee: Josh Elser
> Priority: Trivial
> Time Spent: 20m
> Remaining Estimate: 0h
>
> 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)
