-
gmantele authored
This is easily possible for concatenations, string constants and User Defined Functions having a FunctionDef. A new special datatype was needed for numeric functions and operations: UNKNOWN_NUMERIC. This special type can not be set with FunctionDef.parse(...) and it behaves exactly like the type UNKNOWN, except that DBType.isNumeric() returns true (as .isUnknown()). Thus, while writing the metadata of a result in TAP, nothing changes: an UNKNOWN_NUMERIC type will be processed similarly as an UNKNOWN type: to use the type returned from the database ResultSet or to set VARCHAR. (no modification of TAP was needed for that)
gmantele authoredThis is easily possible for concatenations, string constants and User Defined Functions having a FunctionDef. A new special datatype was needed for numeric functions and operations: UNKNOWN_NUMERIC. This special type can not be set with FunctionDef.parse(...) and it behaves exactly like the type UNKNOWN, except that DBType.isNumeric() returns true (as .isUnknown()). Thus, while writing the metadata of a result in TAP, nothing changes: an UNKNOWN_NUMERIC type will be processed similarly as an UNKNOWN type: to use the type returned from the database ResultSet or to set VARCHAR. (no modification of TAP was needed for that)