fix: initialize catalog from connection properties

[sheyanjie-qq]

Description

initialize catalog from connection properties

Issue(s)

• Close: Issue Link

Checklist

Please check the items in the checklist if applicable.

• Is the user manual updated?
• Are the test cases passed and automated?
• Is there no significant decrease in test coverage?

[gemini-code-assist]

Code Review

This pull request initializes the catalog field in the AbstractConnection constructor using the database name property and adds corresponding unit tests. The reviewer pointed out that this change introduces redundancy and potential state inconsistency because several subclasses maintain their own local database fields. It is recommended to refactor these subclasses to rely solely on the inherited catalog field from AbstractConnection.

[Copilot]

Pull request overview

This PR initializes Connection.getCatalog() from the incoming connection Properties (specifically TSDBDriver.PROPERTY_KEY_DBNAME) so a newly created connection reflects the configured database/catalog immediately.

Changes:

• Set AbstractConnection.catalog from properties.getProperty(TSDBDriver.PROPERTY_KEY_DBNAME) during construction.
• Refactor AbstractConnectionTest setup to use a helper constructor method.
• Add unit tests verifying catalog initialization from properties and the null case when the property is absent.

Reviewed changes

Copilot reviewed 2 out of 2 changed files in this pull request and generated no comments.

File	Description
src/main/java/com/taosdata/jdbc/AbstractConnection.java	Initialize catalog from connection properties during AbstractConnection construction.
src/test/java/com/taosdata/jdbc/AbstractConnectionTest.java	Add tests ensuring getCatalog() reflects dbname from properties (or null when missing).

---

💡 Add Copilot custom instructions for smarter, more guided reviews. Learn how to get started.

[codecov-commenter]

Codecov Report

✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests.
✅ Project coverage is 80.13%. Comparing base (193a03f) to head (06cdf74).

Additional details and impacted files

@@             Coverage Diff              @@
##               main     #320      +/-   ##
============================================
- Coverage     80.18%   80.13%   -0.06%     
+ Complexity     4465     4463       -2     
============================================
  Files           227      227              
  Lines         13491    13492       +1     
  Branches       1797     1797              
============================================
- Hits          10818    10812       -6     
- Misses         1754     1759       +5     
- Partials        919      921       +2     

Flag	Coverage Δ
unittests	80.13% <100.00%> (-0.06%)	⬇️

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:

• ❄️ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.

[zyyang90]

LGTM