Alexey Yudichev wrote:
>>Also, any thoughts on making the LO vs. bytea behaviour a separate
>>option, rather than lumping it in with 7.1 compatibility? It seems quite
>>possible that you might want to use LOs for get/setBytes() but use the
>>most up to date driver behaviour elsewhere.
> Are there any other changes in driver behaviour triggered by compatibility=7.1 other than LO-related ones? If yes, that would be a good idea to separate them from LO changes, because LOs are the only reason I use compatibility=7.1 parameter.
Currently, the only thing affected by the compatible parameter is the
LO-vs-bytea issue. But there could be behavioural changes in the future
that could be controlled by that same parameter.. as I understand it,
it's there to support existing applications during the transition period
after some sort of behavioural change in the driver, not to support two
different behaviours indefinitely.
In response to
pgsql-jdbc by date
|Next:||From: Christian Niles||Date: 2004-10-25 14:03:09|
|Subject: Re: LargeObject API and OIDs |
|Previous:||From: Alexey Yudichev||Date: 2004-10-25 09:36:28|
|Subject: Re: Problems with protocol V3 after migration to latest driver|