| From: | "Hiroshi Inoue" <Inoue(at)tpf(dot)co(dot)jp> |
|---|---|
| To: | "Bruce Momjian - CVS" <momjian(at)hub(dot)org> |
| Cc: | "pgsql-hackers" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, <pgsql-committers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | RE: pgsql/src/interfaces/jdbc/org/postgresql/jdbc1 (DatabaseMetaData.java) |
| Date: | 2000-09-12 23:46:39 |
| Message-ID: | 000301c01d13$b1d53ce0$2801007e@tpf.co.jp |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-committers pgsql-hackers |
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Behalf Of Bruce Momjian - CVS
>
[snip]
- ----------------------------- Log Message -----------------------------
>
> As if my JDBC patch hasn't already caused enough grief, there is now a
> one-line change necessary. Due to the Mark Holloman "New Relkind for
> Views" patch, my support for views in the driver will need to be updated
> to match. The change to DatabaseMetaData.getTableTypes[][] is as
> follows:
>
> - {"VIEW", "(relkind='r' and relhasrules='t' and relname !~
> '^pg_' and relname !~ '^xinv')"},
> + {"VIEW", "(relkind='v' and relname !~ '^pg_' and relname
> !~ '^xinv')"},
>
Current jdbc driver seems to be able to get no VIEW information
from any RELEASE version of backends.
Hmm,it seems that client app/libs don't mind backward incompatibility.
Don't I have to bother about backward incomatibility which would be
caused by my change ?
If so,I would commit my change about ALTER TABLE DROP COLUMN.
Regards.
Hiroshi Inoue
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Bruce Momjian | 2000-09-12 23:59:12 | Re: [HACKERS] RE: pgsql/src/interfaces/jdbc/org/postgresql/jdbc1 (DatabaseMetaData.java) |
| Previous Message | Bruce Momjian - CVS | 2000-09-12 21:12:46 | pgsql/doc/src/sgml/ref (set.sgml vacuum.sgml) |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Bruce Momjian | 2000-09-12 23:59:12 | Re: [HACKERS] RE: pgsql/src/interfaces/jdbc/org/postgresql/jdbc1 (DatabaseMetaData.java) |
| Previous Message | Mikheev, Vadim | 2000-09-12 23:40:05 | RE: Status of new relation file naming |