Обсуждение: Support for named parameters in the PostgreSQL JDBC driver

Dear PGSQL-JDBC Team,<br /><br /> Could you please let me know if the support for "<i>Named Parameters</i>" in the
JDBCdriver is slated for some future release?<br /><br /> Currently with the 8.1.4 JDBC driver, the call to
<i>CallableStatement.setString(String,String) </i>fails and the <a
href="http://developer.postgresql.org/cvsweb.cgi/%7Echeckout%7E/pgsql/src/interfaces/jdbc/org/postgresql/jdbc3/Attic/AbstractJdbc3Statement.java?rev=1.4;content-type=text%2Fplain;hideattic=0">code
</a>isthrowing the following exception - <br /><br /> "Caused by: org.postgresql.util.PSQLException: Method
org.postgresql.jdbc3.Jdbc3CallableStatement.setString(String,String)is not yet implemented."<br /><br /> Thanks<br />
Ravi<br/><br /><br /><br /><br /><br /> 

On Thu, 16 Nov 2006, Ravi Periasamy wrote:

> Dear PGSQL-JDBC Team,
>
> Could you please let me know if the support for "Named Parameters" in the
> JDBC driver is slated for some future release?
>

Just recently I noticed an overlooked patch that implements this:
http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-jdbc/2006-07/msg00011.php

The suggested patch isn't quite right, but its approach can work in many
cases.  If functions are not overloaded then a simple lookup of parameter
names by the function name would work.  If the function is overloaded we
might be able to use the parameter type given by setXXX to try and
determine what function we're actually calling, but it's probably better
to just error out in that case.

Kris Jurka

The patch looks promising, however my gut reaction to this is that
until it's supported by the protocol this will break more often than
it will work. On top of that named parameters are not part of the SQL
spec.

Dave
On 16-Nov-06, at 12:52 PM, Kris Jurka wrote:

>
>
> On Thu, 16 Nov 2006, Ravi Periasamy wrote:
>
>> Dear PGSQL-JDBC Team,
>> Could you please let me know if the support for "Named Parameters"
>> in the
>> JDBC driver is slated for some future release?
>>
>
> Just recently I noticed an overlooked patch that implements this:
> http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-jdbc/2006-07/msg00011.php
>
> The suggested patch isn't quite right, but its approach can work in
> many cases.  If functions are not overloaded then a simple lookup
> of parameter names by the function name would work.  If the
> function is overloaded we might be able to use the parameter type
> given by setXXX to try and determine what function we're actually
> calling, but it's probably better to just error out in that case.
>
> Kris Jurka
>
> ---------------------------(end of
> broadcast)---------------------------
> TIP 3: Have you checked our extensive FAQ?
>
>               http://www.postgresql.org/docs/faq
>