introduce JDBCTypeDescriptor.getDefaultSqlTypeCode() #4105
Conversation
gavinking
force-pushed
the
sql-type-code
branch
2 times, most recently
from
2a36190
to
190d4e5
Compare
| @@ -108,7 +108,7 @@ | |||
| * | |||
| * @throws MappingException Generally indicates an issue accessing the passed mapping object. | |||
| */ | |||
| int[] sqlTypes(Mapping mapping) throws MappingException; | |||
| int[] getSqlTypeCodes(Mapping mapping) throws MappingException; | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
As much as I like this change, I think this is a backwards compatibility concern. Not sure if that is something we are ok with, but maybe revert the renaming here?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Depends what @sebersole thinks.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I do think it would be nice to minimize changes as much as we can.
Here though, I think we should just make this change. This contract is changing already wrt read-from-jdbc , so implementors and consumers are going to have to change. If we do the whole deprecation paradigm, we are just making them make changes again later if/when we remove the deprecated form)
| @@ -20,7 +20,7 @@ | |||
| */ | |||
| public interface SingleColumnType<T> extends Type { | |||
|
|
|||
| int sqlType(); | |||
| int getJdbcTypeCode(); | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Same backwards compatibility concern here as for Type.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The PR looks good so far, but I am missing some changes to JdbcTypeDescriptorRegistry. IMO the default key for registration should be the sqlTypeCode to be able to have e.g. descriptors for both GIS types and JSON types which both map to the Jdbc type code Types.OTHER
|
Yeah, I guess that's right. |
Well, perhaps not, actually, that's unclear. Currently the only type we have were the SQL and JDBC types differ is Now, naturally we can special-case |
Nothing says the "conflicts" have to register under the key for |
|
Just pushed a fix to a breakage I caused in the build. Sorry. Can you rebase this from upstream wip/6.0 and push again? |
and rename sqlType -> jdbcTypeCode in Type hierarchy for consistency See hibernate#4088
The goal of this PR is to cleanly separate usages of the JDBC type code in interactions with the JDBC API, with usages of the JDBC type code to identify a SQL column type in schema export.
This should fix a bug I introduced a while back.
Also rename
sqlType->jdbcTypeCodesin Type hierarchy for consistency.See #4088
cc @beikov @sebersole