Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: Re: JDBC int8 hack

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Kyle VanderBeek <kylev(at)yaga(dot)com>
Cc: pgsql-patches(at)postgresql(dot)org, peter(at)retep(dot)org(dot)uk
Subject: Re: Re: JDBC int8 hack
Date: 2001-04-13 16:51:59
Message-ID: 4617.987180719@sss.pgh.pa.us (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackerspgsql-patches
Kyle VanderBeek <kylev(at)yaga(dot)com> writes:
> Please consider applying my patch to the 7.0 codebase as a stop-gap 
> measure until such time as the optimizer can be improved to notice 
> indecies on INT8 columns and cast INT arguments up.

I think it's an extremely bad idea to hack up JDBC to get around a
backend shortcoming.  The hack will persist and cause problems long
after the real issue has been fixed.

			regards, tom lane

In response to

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Tom LaneDate: 2001-04-13 17:22:38
Subject: Re: Maybe a plpgsql bug?
Previous:From: Patrick WelcheDate: 2001-04-13 16:48:51
Subject: Re: Call for platforms

pgsql-patches by date

Next:From: Bruce MomjianDate: 2001-04-14 19:12:02
Subject: pgmonitor query global variable
Previous:From: Patrick WelcheDate: 2001-04-13 16:48:51
Subject: Re: Call for platforms

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2014 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group