Subject | Java Intergration - UDFs |
---|---|
Author | Doug Chamberlin |
Post date | 2000-05-15T18:21:30Z |
At 5/15/00 01:22 PM (Monday), Jim Starkey wrote:
The simplest Java integration I see is implementing UDFs in Java. The UDF
definition could be extended to include a class reference in place of the
shared library/DLL and a method name in place of the UDF function name.
The server would have to trap Java exceptions and translate/return them to
the client.
From the beginning I would like to see parameters as class instances with
a common ancestor which provides some type of IsNull flag. The server would
have to instantiate those objects before calling the UDF class's UDF
method, of course. It can set the IsNull flag for incoming params at that
point.
Any problems mapping data types for parameters?
Should we allow for class references on other machines (via URL)? Now that
would be a performance hit!
>I suggest we spend a little time talking about Java integration issues.OK!
The simplest Java integration I see is implementing UDFs in Java. The UDF
definition could be extended to include a class reference in place of the
shared library/DLL and a method name in place of the UDF function name.
The server would have to trap Java exceptions and translate/return them to
the client.
From the beginning I would like to see parameters as class instances with
a common ancestor which provides some type of IsNull flag. The server would
have to instantiate those objects before calling the UDF class's UDF
method, of course. It can set the IsNull flag for incoming params at that
point.
Any problems mapping data types for parameters?
Should we allow for class references on other machines (via URL)? Now that
would be a performance hit!