[ 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-6055?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=16584666#comment-16584666
 ] 

Nikolay Izhikov edited comment on IGNITE-6055 at 8/18/18 6:21 AM:
------------------------------------------------------------------

[~vozerov], [~isapego]

Guys, I crawl through CPP thin client sources and didn't find the support of 
QueryEntity and QueryFields that updated in this task.
Do we support it in CPP thin client?
Can you give me a hint where I can find them? So I can patch CPP thin client by 
myself.

> Python

I don't see any Python thin client implementation.

> NodeJS

It already have support for a {{_precision}} and {{_scale}}. 
I've updated protocol version and it seems all tests to be working.
I will check it on TC and provide a link.

> ODBC

I look at sources and didn't understand what needs to be done.
Looks like we didn't use QueryEntity or QueryField so everything is fine here.

Can you give me advice? What do we need to patch in ODBC module?


was (Author: nizhikov):
[~vozerov], [~isapego]

Guys, I crawl through CPP thin client sources and didn't find the support of 
QueryEntity and QueryFields that updated in this task.
Do we support it in CPP thin client?
Can you give me a hint where I can find them? So I can patch CPP thin client by 
myself.

> Python

I don't see any Python thin client implementation.

> NodeJS

It already have support for a {{_precision}} and {{_scale}}. 
I've updated protocol version and it seems all tests to be working.
I will check it on TC and provide a link.

> SQL: Add String length constraint
> ---------------------------------
>
>                 Key: IGNITE-6055
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-6055
>             Project: Ignite
>          Issue Type: Task
>          Components: sql
>    Affects Versions: 2.1
>            Reporter: Vladimir Ozerov
>            Assignee: Nikolay Izhikov
>            Priority: Major
>              Labels: sql-engine
>             Fix For: 2.7
>
>
> We should support {{CHAR(X)}} and {{VARCHAR{X}} syntax. Currently, we ignore 
> it. First, it affects semantics. E.g., one can insert a string with greater 
> length into a cache/table without any problems. Second, it limits efficiency 
> of our default configuration. E.g., index inline cannot be applied to 
> {{String}} data type as we cannot guess it's length.



--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v7.6.3#76005)

Reply via email to