Re: IN clauses via setObject(Collection) [Was: Re: Prepared

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
От Paul Thomas
Тема Re: IN clauses via setObject(Collection) [Was: Re: Prepared
Дата
Msg-id 20030722093410.C4376@bacon
обсуждение исходный текст
Ответ на Re: IN clauses via setObject(Collection) [Was: Re: Prepared  (Fernando Nasser <fnasser@redhat.com>)
Ответы Re: IN clauses via setObject(Collection) [Was: Re: Prepared  (Felipe Schnack <felipes@ritterdosreis.br>)
Список pgsql-jdbc
On 21/07/2003 18:51 Fernando Nasser wrote:
> Also, we may limit this behavior with Collections to the IN clause
> only.  Where else could we need lists to replace the '?' ?

Nowhere. Not even with an IN clause. If the programmer needs IN(1,2,3,4,5)
then he must write IN(?,?,?,?,?) in his prepare string. That's the way
JDBC works. Period. Acceptance of any other behaviour is un-professional
and against the standards. As you said yourself, neither Oracle nor DB2
support this behavior. Neither should PostgreSQL.


--
Paul Thomas
+------------------------------+---------------------------------------------+
| Thomas Micro Systems Limited | Software Solutions for the Smaller
Business |
| Computer Consultants         |
http://www.thomas-micro-systems-ltd.co.uk   |
+------------------------------+---------------------------------------------+

В списке pgsql-jdbc по дате отправления:

Предыдущее
От: Dave Cramer
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: RFC: Removal of support for JDBC1 drivers.
Следующее
От: Oliver Jowett
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: Patch applied for SQL Injection vulnerability for setObject(int,Object,int)