Re: Bugs in WorkflowQuery

Also, the query stuff has been updated from another user and there is a
patch in JIRA, so when I get around to applying the patch it may resolve
these issues.

-Pat

----- Original Message -----
From: "Hani Suleiman" <[email protected]>
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: Wednesday, April 30, 2003 9:02 AM
Subject: Re: [Opensymphony-developers] Bugs in WorkflowQuery


> Your patches look oddly indented. can you file an issue in jira for
> these? Thanks!
>
> On Wednesday, April 30, 2003, at 08:40 AM, Philipp Hug wrote:
>
> > I found some problems in WorkflowQuery and JDBCWorkflowStore:
> >
> > 1. JDBCWorkflowStore cannot handle queries with null values such as:
> >     WorkflowQuery(WorkflowQuery.OWNER, WorkflowQuery.CURRENT,
> > WorkflowQuery.EQUALS, null)
> > this results in a NPE.
> >
> > Patch: JDBCWorkflowStore.java
> > 661c661,665
> > <         right = value.toString();
> > ---
> >>         if (value != null) {
> >>             right = "'" + escape(value.toString()) + "'";
> >>         } else {
> >>             right = "null";
> >>         }
> > 663c667
> > <         return left + oper + "'" + escape(right) + "'";
> > ---
> >>         return left + oper + right;
> >
> >
> > 2. recursive queries are handled incorrectly:
> > if the root WorkflowQuery object is an AND/OR/XOR query, qtype is set
> > to
> > zero.
> > JDBCWorkflowStore just uses the qtype of the left query:
> >             if (query.getLeft() != null) {
> >                 qtype = query.getLeft().getType();
> > but if this query object is also an AND/OR or XOR query it'll use zero
> > as
> > qtype and
> > it will build a query that searches in the HISTORY_STEPS table.
> >
> > Patch:
> > -> move code from JDBCWorkflStore to WorkflowQuery
> > -> do recursive search for qtype instead of just going one level down.
> >
> > WorkflowQuery
> > diff -r1.1 -r1.2
> > 17c17
> > <  * @version $Revision: 1.1 $
> > ---
> >>  * @version $Revision: 1.2 $
> > 84c84,95
> > <         return type;
> > ---
> >>         int qtype = type;
> >>
> >>         if (qtype == 0) { // then not set, so look in sub queries
> >>                           // todo: not sure if you would have a query
> >> that
> > would look in both old and new, if so, i'll have to change this - TR
> >>                           // but then again, why are there redundant
> > tables in the first place? the data model should probably change
> >>
> >>             if (getLeft() != null) {
> >>                 qtype = getLeft().getType();
> >>             }
> >>         }
> >>
> >>         return qtype;
> >
> >
> > philipp
> >
> >
> >
> > -------------------------------------------------------
> > This sf.net email is sponsored by:ThinkGeek
> > Welcome to geek heaven.
> > http://thinkgeek.com/sf
> > _______________________________________________
> > Opensymphony-developers mailing list
> > [email protected]
> > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/opensymphony-developers
> >
>
>
>
> -------------------------------------------------------
> This sf.net email is sponsored by:ThinkGeek
> Welcome to geek heaven.
> http://thinkgeek.com/sf
> _______________________________________________
> Opensymphony-developers mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/opensymphony-developers



-------------------------------------------------------
This sf.net email is sponsored by:ThinkGeek
Welcome to geek heaven.
http://thinkgeek.com/sf