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

Re: Large Object problems (was Re: JDBC int8 hack)

From: Peter T Mount <peter(at)retep(dot)org(dot)uk>
To: Kyle VanderBeek <kylev(at)yaga(dot)com>
Cc: Peter Mount <peter(at)retep(dot)org(dot)uk>, pgsql-patches(at)postgresql(dot)org, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Large Object problems (was Re: JDBC int8 hack)
Date: 2001-04-17 13:11:54
Message-ID: 987513114.3adc411a04a36@webmail.retep.org.uk (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackerspgsql-patches
Quoting Kyle VanderBeek <kylev(at)yaga(dot)com>:

> On Tue, Apr 10, 2001 at 02:24:24PM +0100, Peter Mount wrote:
> > At 18:30 09/04/01 -0700, Kyle VanderBeek wrote:
> > >This is a new feature?  Using indecies is "new"?  I guess I really
> beg to
> > >differ.  Seems like a bugfix to me (in the "workaround" category).
> > 
> > Yes they are. INT8 is not a feature/type yet supported by the driver,
> hence 
> > it's "new".
> > 
> > Infact the jdbc driver supports no array's at this time (as PostgreSQL
> & 
> > SQL3 arrays are different beasts).
> > 
> > If it's worked in the past, then that was sheer luck.
> 
> Alright man, you've got me confused.  Are you saying that despite the 
> existance of INT8 as a column type, and PreparedStatement.setLong(),
> that 
> these ought not be used?  If so, there is a really big warning missing 
> from the documentation!

Erm, int8 isn't long, but an array of 8 int's (unless it's changed).

> I guess I'm asking this: I've got an enterprise database runnign 7.0.3
> ready to go using INT8 primary keys and being accessed through my
> re-touched JDBC driver.  Am I screwed?  Is it going to break?  If so, I
> need to fix this all very, very fast.
> 
> -- 
> Kyle.
>    "I hate every ape I see, from chimpan-A to chimpan-Z" -- Troy
> McClure
> 



-- 
Peter Mount peter(at)retep(dot)org(dot)uk
PostgreSQL JDBC Driver: http://www.retep.org.uk/postgres/
RetepPDF PDF library for Java: http://www.retep.org.uk/pdf/

In response to

Responses

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Thomas LockhartDate: 2001-04-17 13:25:32
Subject: Re: No printable 7.1 docs?
Previous:From: Theo KramerDate: 2001-04-17 12:27:31
Subject: Talk on Open Source vs Proprietry databases

pgsql-patches by date

Next:From: Peter T MountDate: 2001-04-17 13:27:33
Subject: Re: Large Object problems (was Re: JDBC int8 hack)
Previous:From: Peter EisentrautDate: 2001-04-16 17:56:09
Subject: Re: Patch for PostgreSQL 7.0.3 to compile on Tru64 UNIX v5.0A with Compaq C T6.4-212 (dtk)

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