I think AbstractJdbc1Statement.setObject(int,Object) needs to know how
to handle Java array types.
Last month someone mentioned the desire for using binary protocols and
I agree. Until then, I'd guess that
setObject( new int[]{1,2,3} )
should do
setString( "{1,2,3}" )
And so on for the other Java primitive types and String. I suppose for
Object[] one would get
"{" + x[0].toString() + "," + x[1].toString() ... "}"
That would match the current setObject behavior of defaulting to the
toString() value.
My problem is that I don't see any other way in jdbc to set array
elements of rows. So, this must be it, though unimplemented here.
I could probably whip this up in a couple hours. I'm looking for feed
back on whether it's the right thing to do.
Brian Olson
http://bolson.org/