> Regarding JDBC in the CF process -- other interfaces are handled
> there. I haven't seen one patch this size for JDBC since I've been
> involved, let alone two competing patches to implement the same
> feature. Small patches which can be quickly handled don't make sense
> to put into the process, but it seemed reasonable for these.
In any way I'm sending this patch, and I will put this under Miscellaneous in
CF. This cleared patch takes only 47k (in uncleared was some binary read
classes) and about 50% it's big test case.
Have a nice day,
Radek