Re: JDBC: why is PGobject class instead of interface?

From: Holger Krug <hkrug(at)rationalizer(dot)com>
To: Bear Giles <bear(at)coyotesong(dot)com>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: JDBC: why is PGobject class instead of interface?
Date: 2002-01-08 15:11:24
Message-ID: 20020108161124.A9186@dev12.rationalizer.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers pgsql-jdbc

On Sun, Jan 06, 2002 at 05:00:35PM -0700, Bear Giles wrote:
> I can implement the mapping by casting between the objects and text,
> but if a type extension mechanism is available it would be nice to be
> able to hide those details from the user.

The type extension mechanism inherent in JDBC is provided by an
implementation of java.sql.Connection.setTypeMap(Map map) and related
methods. The PostgreSQL JDBC driver has not yet got this feature. I
think it would be fine if somebody would add this to PostgreSQL ;-)

--
Holger Krug
hkrug(at)rationalizer(dot)com

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Holger Krug 2002-01-08 15:13:22 Re: Time as keyword
Previous Message Thomas Lockhart 2002-01-08 15:00:11 Re: GETTIMEOFDAY_1ARG change

Browse pgsql-jdbc by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Barry Lind 2002-01-08 17:49:47 Re: best way to use bitvarying?
Previous Message Anil Jangam 2002-01-08 13:08:44 Re: Feature enquiry in pgsql driver.