Re: jdbc cts final diff for review

On 29-Jun-05, at 9:17 AM, Oliver Jowett wrote:

Dave Cramer wrote:

Attached is the patch for review. QueryExecutor is unchanged now.

The only iffy bit is where I check for the in parameter being bound  to void type. It could be done in checkAllParametersSet

I'd like to commit this shortly.

Ok, comments from just reading the patch.. I like the approach much better than the previous one, but the details need some cleanup.

Rather than putting knowledge of parameter direction into ParameterList, how about just allowing access to the type OID, and the caller checks for Oid.VOID? Then the ParameterList interface changes less and the change to use a Parameter class is unnecessary as the list doesn't need to store a direction value.

If you must store a direction value in the list, then another array might be better than wrapping everything up in an object (generates less garbage overall). Also, there are a few places that return magic values for the direction that should be using the symbolic constants you've defined elsewhere.

I thought of this, however even arrays have to be garbage collected.. Is there really much difference internally between new Parameter and new int?

I'm ambivalent though it's not a big change either way. 

The change to checkAllParametersSet to not check OUT parameters seems unnecessary -- won't OUT parameters be set to the (non-null) NULL_OBJECT anyway?

!                     // this is here for the sole purpose of passing the cts

!                     if ( columnType == Types.DOUBLE && functionReturnType[i] == Types.REAL )

!                     {

!                         // return it as a float

!                         if ( callResult[i] != null)

!                             callResult[i] = new Float(((Double)callResult[i]).floatValue());

!                     }

I'll go through my notes, but I can tell you it was a catch 22 problem mostly likely an artifact of Oracle not having a REAL type.

We can't do that! If it's failing that's probably because we're not doing the necessary implicit typecasts required by the spec..

Please explain what's going on here:

from an SQL point of view FLOAT, and double are FLOAT8 types, REAL is the only one that is FLOAT4

+         case Types.FLOAT:                // TODO: FLOAT and REAL were FLOAT8 for the cts

      public void setFloat(int parameterIndex, float x) throws SQLException

      {

          checkClosed();

!         bindLiteral(parameterIndex, Float.toString(x), Oid.FLOAT8);

      }

  

(the bind changed from Oid.FLOAT4 to Oid.FLOAT8..)

You seem to have reverted your earlier changes and put back the types/* classes -- why?

huh ? they should be in there in HEAD, I did remove the creation of an object, and went to static methods 

adjustParamIndex() should be removed entirely if it's now always a no-op.

yeah

Why is type translation for JDBC2 types only done in the JDBC3 code (in registerOutParameter)? -- shouldn't that be in the JDBC2 code?

Good point

There are a bunch of gratuitous changes to the test code that probably shouldn't be committed, e.g. in BatchExecuteTest:

agreed, they are for my own testing

+         try

+         {

+             Class.forName("org.postgresql.Driver");

+         }

+         catch( Exception ex){}

similarly in many other test classes.

....

It might be an idea to break this up into "support new-style OUT parameters" and "other fixes necessary to pass the CTS" as currently it's quite unclear which is which..

Well, they are all related OUT parameters are required to support the CTS

-O