Re: [Farrago-developers] one more on Eigenbase perforce change 9342 for review

[Jack F. <ja...@ao...>]

Yes, it is redundant.  It was a quick check in after a marathon 
debugging session.  I have removed it in my files.  Do you want me to 
check the fix in?

/Jack


js...@gm... wrote:
> The change below broke the way LucidDB's Blackhawk-based test 
> framework overrides FarragoTestCase.  It looks like the instanceof 
> check is redundant in this case, since all of the called sub-methods 
> are now protecting themselves, right?
>
> JVS
>
> Julian Hyde wrote:
>> http://p4web.eigenbase.org/@md=d&c=6PU@//9342?ac=10
>>
>> Change 9342 by jh...@jh...rmalade3 on 2007/05/26 00:25:23
>>
>>   DEV: Integrate from //open/dt/dev/...@9326
>>
>> ==== 
>> //open/dev/farrago/src/net/sf/farrago/test/FarragoTestCase.java#57 
>> (ktext) ====
>> 696,700c697,703
>> <             restoreCleanupParameters();
>> <             dropSchemas();
>> <             dropDataWrappers();
>> <             dropDataServers();
>> <             dropAuthIds();
>> ---
>>>             if (connection instanceof FarragoJdbcEngineConnection) {
>>>                 restoreCleanupParameters();
>>>                 dropSchemas();
>>>                 dropDataWrappers();
>>>                 dropDataServers();
>>>                 dropAuthIds();
>>>             }