Mike Fowler-3 wrote
> Long term we'll have to see whether we want to maintain two codebases.
> For now let's experiment and see how things progress. There are pros and
> cons to both codebases, neither are perfect. With that in mind this is
> open source and people are free to do their own thing but there is
> strength in numbers. We obviously all care about PostgreSQL and it's
> JDBC driver so let us all try and make the best JDBC driver(s) possible!
Slightly tangential but to what degree is adhering to JDBC limiting our
ability to fully explore the power of the PostgreSQL database?
One example that comes to mind is that because "?" is the JDBC placeholder,
as opposed to ":var_name" in the native C library, it is (AFAICS) impossible
to write a query that uses "?" as an operator. Dollar-Quoting issues also
come to mind.
Is it possible to have a "true PostgreSQL driver" with a "JDBC wrapper". I
get you can access the raw implementation instead of using JDBC interfaces
but are there things being internally that could be done different if using
a layered approach?
David J.
--
View this message in context: http://postgresql.1045698.n5.nabble.com/JDBC-4-Compliance-tp5760468p5761441.html
Sent from the PostgreSQL - jdbc mailing list archive at Nabble.com.