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

Re: bit datatype and getObject()

From: "Kevin Grittner" <Kevin(dot)Grittner(at)wicourts(dot)gov>
To: "Kris Jurka" <books(at)ejurka(dot)com>
Cc: "Thomas Kellerer" <spam_eater(at)gmx(dot)net>,<pgsql-jdbc(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: bit datatype and getObject()
Date: 2010-12-22 20:32:26
Message-ID: 4D120BFA02000025000389FA@gw.wicourts.gov (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-jdbc
Kris Jurka <books(at)ejurka(dot)com> wrote:
 
> The standard says nothing useful.  Section 8.3.3 of this document
> implies that as an application developer you should just pretend
> multi-bit strings don't exist...
 
BitSet is tempting, but the fuzzy definition of size seems to be a
killer.  We clearly don't want to use length() instead of size(). 
Unless someone can make a convincing argument to the contrary, I'm
inclined to agree that we should just us a Java String of '0' and
'1' characters.
 
-Kevin

In response to

pgsql-jdbc by date

Next:From: Degrassi FrancescoDate: 2010-12-22 21:09:00
Subject: Re: Postgresql XA prepare() method behaviour
Previous:From: Kris JurkaDate: 2010-12-22 20:13:37
Subject: Re: bit datatype and getObject()

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