On Feb 14, 2007, at 10:32 AM, Kris Jurka wrote:
> On Wed, 14 Feb 2007, Jeffrey Cox wrote:
>> I can make them handy, but when you say they don't work do you
>> mean it crashes, or what exactly. I ask only because the DBMS
>> seems to have varying support for the method overall. below 7.3
>> not being able to support the call at all, below 8.0 not
>> supporting argument names and below 8.1 not supporting argument
>> modes. when I say not supporting, I mean there is not column for
>> the data in 'pg_proc'. I didn't actually try this against those
>> over servers, but looked it up in the respective documentation of
>> each server version. I suppose that information might reside in
>> another table, I will have to install the other versions and find
> 1) Your tests try to create functions with named and output
> parameters unconditionally. These can't be created on older servers.
ok will change
> 2) The code you've added to TestUtil uses dollar quoting which
> isn't available on all servers.
ok will change it.
> 3) The code in getProcedureColumns fails with a "couldn't find a
> column named ..." for older server versions. You need to either
> add ", NULL as colname" to the sql for older versions or not fetch
> these columns unconditionally.
yea.. I see that now.
So in the end, what you are saying is stop being a ninny and fire up
more versions of the DBMS and properly test this... sorry about that.
Do you all have a recommended test setup. (i.e. do you have every
version up and running?)
>>> 1) It's better to send all your changes as one patch instead of
>>> one per file. It makes it easier to apply.
>> good to know, would you like me to resend them?
> No, that's just a minor inconvenience, not an actual problem.
> Kris Jurka
In response to
pgsql-jdbc by date
|Next:||From: Kris Jurka||Date: 2007-02-14 17:47:52|
|Subject: Re: getProcedureColumns|
|Previous:||From: Heikki Linnakangas||Date: 2007-02-14 16:59:43|
|Subject: Re: Problem with jdbc connection behavior|