On Jun 27, 2013, at 7:48 AM, David Johnston <polobo@yahoo.com> wrote:
> 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?
My new codebase is structured exactly this way. There is a PostgreSQL driver and a comfortably fitting JDBC layer on
topof it. One could take the driver itself define a new API and use it that way if they wished.
Although, the example you give is probably very easily handled as an extension through the JDBC layer (just provide and
escapesyntax like ??). It's interesting to note that SQL itself says the ? is sacred and only to be used as a
parameterplaceholder.
>
> 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.
>
>
> --
> Sent via pgsql-jdbc mailing list (pgsql-jdbc@postgresql.org)
> To make changes to your subscription:
> http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-jdbc