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
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
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

Browse pgsql-jdbc by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Gregory Stark 2007-12-20 10:04:59 Re: TypeInfoCache
Previous Message Jan de Visser 2007-12-20 01:39:29 TypeInfoCache