BUG: Export DDL and Data fails for mixed case table/column names

Question

Hi there,
I have found a bug in SQL Developer. See details below.
Description:
When "Export DDL and Data) function is used on a table/columns not named in UPPERCASE, sql generated by SQL Developer is invalid.
Steps to reproduce:
- open SQL Developer, connect to DB
- make a table named "lowerCase" (in double quotes, so it won't be automatically changed to capital letters)
- you may also add some columns, for example "lowerCol1", "UpCol2", ALLUPCOL3
- add some data rows to the table
- choose Tools -> Export DDL and Data
- check exporting of tables and data, on "filter" tabs choose your "lowerCase" table
- press "Apply"
Error:
Generated SQL contains invalid INSERTs: mixed-case table and columns are referenced without obligatory double quotes, which yields an error when generated script is executed (see below, relevant line is underlined)
-- DDL for Table lowerCase
CREATE TABLE "DBO_HT"."lowerCase"
(     "lowerCol1" VARCHAR2(100),
     "UpCol2" VARCHAR2(100),
     "ALLUPCOL3" VARCHAR2(100)
-- DATA FOR TABLE lowerCase
-- FILTER = none used
-- INSERTING into lowerCase
Insert into lowerCase (lowerCol1,UpCol2,ALLUPCOL3) values ('lc','uc','auc');
-- END DATA FOR TABLE lowerCase
Remarks
SQL Developer: version 1.2.1, build MAIN-32.13
Oracle DBs: 9.2 & Express
OS: Windows 2000 Professional
If you need any more details/testing, let me know. I'd really appreciate a quick patch for this issue...
Alternatively, do you know of any other simple way of copying a single database (it's called a schema in Oracle, right?) from one computer to another? Possibly something so simple like detaching->copying->reattaching mdf (data) files in SQL Server... I thought that this "Export DDL&Data" function will do, but as you can see I couldn't use it.
I just need a simple solution that works - one operation on source to stuff, get the resulting files to other computer and one operation to have it running there... I think that such scenario is very basic, yet I just can't achieve it and I am simply not allowed to spend more time on it (read: our test project fails, my company rejects my "lobbying" and stays with MSSQL :/ )
Thanks a lot & bye

Answer 1

Thanks for your reply.
ad. 1)
You're right. I just wanted to give some very short feedback on my experiences with SQL Developer, so I didn't think starting new threads would be necessary, but as I was writing it became much bigger than I initially planned - sorry about that. I will make proper threads as soon as possible. Having "Edit post" button on this forum would also be useful.
ad. 2)
Generally, you're right - in most cases it's true that "switching DBMS is a major commitment" and "you will produce terrible code" if you don't learn the new one.
However, I think that you miss one part of market here - the market that I think Express is also targeted on. I'd call it a "fire&forget databases" market; MySQL comes to mind as possibly most common solution here. It's the rather small systems, possibly web-accessed, whose data-throughput requirements are rather modest; the point is to store data at all, and not necesarily in fastest way, because given the amount of data that is used, even on low-end hardware it will work well enough. What's important here is its general ease of use - how easy is to set up such system, connect and access data, develop a software using it, how much maintenance is needed, how easy this maintenance is, how easy are the most common development tasks as creating a DB, moving a DB from test to production server etc. There, "how easy" directly translates to "how much time we need to set it up", which translates to "how much will the development will cost".
Considering the current technology, switching the DBMS in such systems is not necesarily a major commitment and believe me that you will not produce terrible code. In many cases it's as simple as changing a switch in your ORM toolkit: hibernate.dialect = Hibernate.Dialect.OracleDialect vs MySQLDialect vs MsSql2005Dialect
Therefore, in some part of market it's easy to switch DBMS, even on project-by-project basis. The reason to switch will appear when other DBMS makes life easier => development faster. From that point of view, I can understand my colleagues giving me an embarassing look and saying "come on, I won't read all these docs just to have db copied to test server". And it doesn't mean "they are not willing to learn anything new", it's just that they feel such basic task should have self-explaining solution that doesn't require mastering any special knowledge. And if they get such simple solutions somewhere else, it costs them nothing to change the hibernate dialect.
I think Oracle did the great job with introducing the Express to this "fire&forget" market. The installation is a snap, it just works out of the box, nothing serious to configure, opposite to what I remember from installing and working on Oracle 9 a few years ago. In some places it's still "you need to start SQL*Plus and enter this script", but it's definitely less than before. I also find the SQL Developer a great tool, it can do most of what we need to do with the DB, it's also much better and pleasant to use over Oracle 9 tools. Still, a few basic things still require too much hassle, and I'd say taking your schema to another machine is one of them. So I think that, if you do it well, the "schema copy wizard" you mentioned might be very helpful. If I was to give any general advice for Express line of DB/tools, I'd say "make things simple" - make it "a DB you can't see".
That's, IMHO, the way to attract more Express users.