| From: | Kris Jurka <books(at)ejurka(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Oliver Jowett <oliver(at)opencloud(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Daniel Migowski <dmigowski(at)ikoffice(dot)de>, 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 10:53:30 |
| Message-ID: | Pine.BSO.4.64.0712200547450.15638@leary.csoft.net |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-jdbc |
On Thu, 20 Dec 2007, Oliver Jowett wrote:
> My main concern is that 'text' is a very common type to use in PostgreSQL
> based designs, and that JDBC applications are more likely to understand how
> to interpret a field that claims to be VARCHAR than one that is LONGVARCHAR,
> given that LONGVARCHAR is a relatively strange type and at best poorly
> defined.
This is my concern as well, which is why I suggested that changing the
precision value might be a better solution. Daniel, any opinion on that
alternative?
Kris Jurka
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Kris Jurka | 2007-12-20 10:54:57 | Re: TypeInfoCache |
| Previous Message | Gregory Stark | 2007-12-20 10:51:38 | Re: TypeInfoCache |