> -----Original Message-----
> From: Hiroshi Inoue [mailto:Inoue(at)tpf(dot)co(dot)jp]
> Sent: 25 January 2001 10:15
> To: Dave Page
> Cc: Bruce Momjian; 'pgsql-odbc(at)postgresql(dot)org'
> Subject: Re: [ODBC] RE: [PATCHES] ODBC Patch for OJs/Large
> Querys & Rows
> It's not me who would send such queries. For exmaple, intelligent
> DAO/RDO/ADO could see that a long or an oj query is allowed and
> send such queries automatically in some cases though I don't know
> if it would really occur or not.
Yes, that could happen, though in reality I suspect it proably wouldn't as
(in my experience - I may be wrong) those technologies do little more than
putting SELECT * FROM in front of a given table name and generating query
I suspect that more problems may be caused for apps like MS Query or Seagate
Crystal Reports which might attempt to use outer joins on an older database
(actually Query just enables/disables the relevant join options). As far as
I can tell, the driver doesn't check the backend version (despite returning
the DBMS version which is currently hardcoded), so we'd either need to add a
7.1 protocol option (not nice as it isn't really a different protocol) or do
a SELECT VERSION() on connect to get the exact version string and figure out
what is/isn't possible from that.
I'll look into it but I'm on the wrong end of the learning curve here!
pgsql-odbc by date
|Next:||From: Dave Page||Date: 2001-01-25 11:23:27|
|Subject: Yet another ODBC patch!|
|Previous:||From: Hiroshi Inoue||Date: 2001-01-25 10:15:19|
|Subject: Re: RE: [PATCHES] ODBC Patch for OJs/Large Querys & Rows|
pgsql-interfaces by date
|Next:||From: Peter T Mount||Date: 2001-01-25 13:26:50|
|Subject: Re: Re: [INTERFACES] jdbc driver: Support for 'BOOL'|
|Previous:||From: Michael Stephenson||Date: 2001-01-25 09:54:41|
|Subject: Re: [PATCHES] Re: [INTERFACES] Patch for JDBC timestamp problems|