Re: tightening up on use of oid 0

Hi,

Interesting, thanks for your feedback.

regards
Iain
----- Original Message -----
From: "Oliver Jowett" <oliver@opencloud.com>
To: "Iain" <iain@mst.co.jp>
Cc: <pgsql-jdbc@postgresql.org>
Sent: Thursday, October 14, 2004 11:40 AM
Subject: Re: [JDBC] tightening up on use of oid 0


> Iain wrote:
>> Hi Oliver,
>>
>> Just out of interest, is the case you marked,
>>
>>>   setObject(i, (Integer)null);     // (*)
>>
>> equivalent to
>>
>>    Integer someInteger = null;
>>    setObject(i, someInteger);
>>
>> ?
>
> Yes.
>
>> I would ask the question then, is there any situation where there is no
>> alternative to the insufficiantly typed calls you listed?
>
> I think there is always an alternative.
>
> For standard types you can use setNull or setObject with a type code:
>
>   setNull(i, Types.INTEGER);
>   setObject(i, null, Types.INTEGER);
>
> For extension types (classed as Types.OTHER) you can use the singleton
> NULL objects I introduced in my patch:
>
>   setObject(i, PGline.NULL);
>   setObject(i, PGline.NULL, Types.OTHER);
>
> -O
>
> ---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
> TIP 9: the planner will ignore your desire to choose an index scan if your
>      joining column's datatypes do not match