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

Re: AbstractJdbc2Array - another patch

From: Kris Jurka <books(at)ejurka(dot)com>
To: Marek Lewczuk <newsy(at)lewczuk(dot)com>
Cc: pgsql-jdbc <pgsql-jdbc(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: AbstractJdbc2Array - another patch
Date: 2007-10-26 16:13:06
Message-ID: Pine.BSO.4.64.0710261209350.18147@leary.csoft.net (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-jdbc

On Fri, 26 Oct 2007, Marek Lewczuk wrote:

> I see the problem. I assume that we need to add support for array types, 
> which means that org.postgresql.core.Oid must have oid for every base type 
> array, e.g. _INT2 = 1005. It will be also required to add appropriate data 
> within org.postgresql.jdbc2.TypeInfoCache#types. Should I do it ?
>

That doesn't sound right to me because we won't be able to put every 
possible type (think about user defined) into the Oid class.  Perhaps 
getResultSet should convert getBaseTypeName() to oid instead of 
getBaseType?  Then you just need to know if your output is an array or not 
(by checking isMultiDimensional) to know whether you want the oid for type 
or _type.

Kris Jurka

In response to

Responses

pgsql-jdbc by date

Next:From: Marek LewczukDate: 2007-10-26 18:08:17
Subject: Re: AbstractJdbc2Array - another patch
Previous:From: Marek LewczukDate: 2007-10-26 11:49:02
Subject: Re: AbstractJdbc2Array - another patch

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