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

Re: TypeInfoCache

From: Kris Jurka <books(at)ejurka(dot)com>
To: Daniel Migowski <dmigowski(at)ikoffice(dot)de>
Cc: Oliver Jowett <oliver(at)opencloud(dot)com>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Gregory Stark <stark(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, pgsql-jdbc(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: TypeInfoCache
Date: 2007-12-20 04:41:05
Message-ID: Pine.BSO.4.64.0712192320120.16373@leary.csoft.net (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-jdbc

On Wed, 19 Dec 2007, Tom Lane wrote:

> Oliver Jowett <oliver(at)opencloud(dot)com> writes:
>
>> But a "varchar" (with no limit) and "text" *are* interchangeable, which
>> is why we identify text as VARCHAR
>
> But note that varchar-with-no-limit is itself a Postgres-ism: it's
> not allowed by the standard.
>

So should varchar(10000000) be returned as VARCHAR or LONGVARCHAR?

Right now we return 0 for the precision of text or varchar without length. 
Perhaps we should return something else for that similar to how we changed 
the result of ResultSetMetaData.getColumnDisplaySize to return 
Integer.MAX_VALUE instead of -1 for types without lengths.

Kris Jurka

In response to

pgsql-jdbc by date

Next:From: Gregory StarkDate: 2007-12-20 10:04:59
Subject: Re: TypeInfoCache
Previous:From: Jan de VisserDate: 2007-12-20 01:39:29
Subject: TypeInfoCache

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