Re: JDBC: why is PGobject class instead of interface?

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
От Holger Krug
Тема Re: JDBC: why is PGobject class instead of interface?
Дата
Msg-id 20020108161124.A9186@dev12.rationalizer.com
обсуждение исходный текст
Ответ на JDBC: why is PGobject class instead of interface?  (Bear Giles <bear@coyotesong.com>)
Список pgsql-hackers
On Sun, Jan 06, 2002 at 05:00:35PM -0700, Bear Giles wrote:
> I can implement the mapping by casting between the objects and text,
> but if a type extension mechanism is available it would be nice to be
> able to hide those details from the user.

The type extension mechanism inherent in JDBC is provided by an
implementation of java.sql.Connection.setTypeMap(Map map) and related
methods. The PostgreSQL JDBC driver has not yet got this feature. I
think it would be fine if somebody would add this to PostgreSQL ;-)

-- 
Holger Krug
hkrug@rationalizer.com


В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления:

Предыдущее
От: Holger Krug
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: Time as keyword
Следующее
От: Tom Lane
Дата:
Сообщение: Finally ready to go for RC1?