-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 90
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Support Informix #436
Support Informix #436
Conversation
… still not working) -moved setAutoCommit to AbstractDbEnvironment.afterConnectionEstablished -added calls to getAutoCommit before calling setAutoCommit -removed overrides to commit / afterConnectionEstablished in InformixEnvironment
paramDirection, getSqlType(dataType), getJavaClass(dataType), | ||
paramPosition, normaliseTypeName(dataType), userTypeName); | ||
|
||
return dbp; | ||
} | ||
|
||
private OracleDbParameterAccessor createOracleDbParameterAcccessor( |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Would it work if we just override createDbParameterAcccessor
here? (Just to be keep things like in other envs).
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
We can overload createDbParameterAcccessor
(the Oracle env method has the extra String userTypeName
param) just to give this the same name as in AbstractDbEnvironment
.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
OK, let's rename and add @Override
annotation.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I can rename/overload but not add the annotation as we're not overriding the super-type's method.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Ah, we have different list of parameters. Then I think it would be better to keep it as it is - with Oracle in the name (just to make it more obvious that it's a bit different).
@@ -245,7 +247,8 @@ public Class getJavaClass(String dataType) { | |||
if (!dataType.equals("void")) { | |||
allParams.put("", new DbParameterAccessor("", |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Also here - createDbParameterAccessor
vs new ...
@@ -1,5 +1,6 @@ | |||
package dbfit.util; | |||
|
|||
import dbfit.util.TypeTransformer; |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I guess this import is also unused.
Ok. All applied. |
Ah, need to revert that overloading! |
…lign method names
@@ -14,9 +14,9 @@ | |||
return parameterAccessors; | |||
} | |||
|
|||
public void add(String name, Direction direction, int sqlType, Class javaType) { | |||
public void add(String name, Direction direction, int sqlType, Class javaType, TypeTransformerFactory dbfitToJdbcTransformerFactory) { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
This TypeTransformerFactory dbfitToJdbcTransformerFactory
may have been moved as attribute (and initialized via the constructor) instead of passing it as parameter.
But no urgency to tweak that. Can be revised some other time.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I'm just about to push a commit to change this...
I think we're already in relatively good shape here. As we proceed towards merging the stuff:
|
…transformer via contructor
Shall we try to slice this off and merge it before the main Informix changes? |
If "yes", then can you give me a few pointers on how to do that? |
Well, let me have a crack at this http://stackoverflow.com/questions/1628563/move-the-most-recent-commits-to-a-new-branch-with-git ...first. |
Yes. If we're about to squash the commits - then one approach is:
If history is about to be preserved: some variation of |
We've touched I guess I'll have to go looking for the commit where this direction (the 2nd change) was started. Or do you know another way of approaching this? |
Sorry, make that just |
The docs for the --no-squash variant say it commits so no chance of even using rebase -i. |
I guess I can just undo that change on that one file and deal with the conflict later when merging the Informix stuff. |
...and |
Right... I've forgotten about that |
Part one created on #448. |
Support for Informix (using alternate approach of allowing
StatementExecution
sub-classing instead of adding more parameters to existing class methods and more property getters on theDBEnvironment
interface).TODO:
transform to JDBC - compatible type
methodJDBC
toJdbc
for the newly created fields and classes