Instead of using the patch, how about just changing the code to work with
Oracle's 10g JDBC driver that is JDBC 3.0 compliant.
I already patched my local village code to work with it.
The only change is located in Value.java:
In the
public Value(ResultSet rs, int columnNumber, int type)
Constructor,
change the BLOB case to this:
case Types.BLOB:
Blob blob = rs.getBlob(columnNumber);
// Changed to support null blob values (for oracle)
// valueObject = blob.getBytes(1, (int) blob.length());
valueObject = (blob != null) ? blob.getBytes(1, (int)
blob.length()) : null;
break;
It's DB agnostic, but it works with Oracle's unusual handling of null
for BLOBs
If you don't make this change and use Oracle's 10 driver, you will get
an NPE in certain cases.
Thomas Fischer wrote:
It is not possible to replace the non-patched version with the patched
version. The patched version only works for oracle.
For inclusion in another directory: I am not aware that we have any license
grant from the patch author (saravanna kannan, I believe) for the patches.
If this is true, we'd have to get that first.
Thomas
Robert Dietrick <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> schrieb am 06.07.2007 19:06:50:
On the topic of the Village classes, I found that the village 2.0 JAR
file packaged with the 3.x releases of Torque does not contain the
Oracle LOB support patch
(https://sweb.uky.edu/~skkann2/village/index.html). Would it be
possible to include this patched Village library with the next version
of Torque?
If replacing the default Village jar with this version breaks
compatibility with other DBs, perhaps it can still be included in some
non-standard directory of the Torque distribution, with a release note
explaining its inclusion?
-rob
ext Thomas Fischer wrote:
Asking on general@ sounds good to me.
Sorry for not being responsive in the last few months, I have a very
time-conduming project running at work.
Thomas
Scott Eade <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> schrieb am 06.07.2007 01:30:24:
Thomas Vandahl wrote:
How do we proceed here? I wanted to call for a release vote but I
would
rather sort this out before. Is it possible to use the Village code
as
it is (2.0, I mean)? Then we could simply wrestle it and check it in.
Or
do we have to change the packages and all imports That would be a
PITA
because at least Record is probably used by most of the Torque
applications.
I did ask on members@ whether or not it would be okay for us to retain
the existing package names. There was a little discussion over
whether
or not we could import this code (which we can) but nobody raised any
concerns about the package naming (i.e. the question to which I made
serious efforts to point the discussion towards was ignored and I am
interpreting this as "there are no serious concerns with this").
Since Torque is the responsibility of the DB PMC I will raise this on
general@ so that there is an opportunity for objections to be raised
there.
Scott
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
