DatabaseIdentifier #250
Merged
DatabaseIdentifier #250
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
bbimber
approved these changes
Apr 10, 2025
labkey-adam
approved these changes
Apr 29, 2025
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Rationale
Generating correct sql is very dependent on everyone writing identifier consistently. This is often handled by using append(SqlDialect.makeLegalIdentifier(col.getAlias())) or luck append(col.getName()) or append(col.getAlias()).
The idea is to pass around database identifiers such as table names, column names, both generated and from db metadata, using a class DatabaseIdentifier.
Related Pull Requests
Changes