Re: Re: [JDBC] New backend functions? [was Re: JDBC changes for 7.2... some questions...]

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Rene Pijlman <rpijlman(at)wanadoo(dot)nl>
Cc: Ned Wolpert <ned(dot)wolpert(at)knowledgenet(dot)com>, Barry Lind <barry(at)xythos(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, "pgsql-jdbc(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-jdbc(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Re: [JDBC] New backend functions? [was Re: JDBC changes for 7.2... some questions...]
Date: 2001-08-23 21:56:51
Message-ID: 16075.998603811@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers pgsql-jdbc

Rene Pijlman <rpijlman(at)wanadoo(dot)nl> writes:
> On Thu, 23 Aug 2001 14:44:19 -0400, you wrote:
>> seems doable and reasonable to me: whenever an OID is returned
>> to the client in an INSERT or UPDATE command result, also stash it in
>> a static variable that can be picked up by this function.

> What should the semantics be exactly?

Just the same as the command result string.

> How about the multiple INSERT's i've been reading about on
> hackers? ... Only the OID of the last row inserted by the
> statement?

No OID is returned when multiple rows are inserted or updated. I'd say
that should be the semantics of this function, too.

> How about JDBC batchExecute() when it performs multiple
> INSERT/UPDATE's?

By definition, this is a backend function. It cannot know anything of
JDBC.

> I assume this OID would be associated with a client connection.
> Is this going to work with client side connection pooling?

Good point. Will this really get around the original poster's problem??

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2001-08-23 22:01:28 Re: Remove --enable-syslog?
Previous Message Magnus Naeslund(f) 2001-08-23 21:22:14 [PATCH] Win32 errno a little bit safer

Browse pgsql-jdbc by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Ned Wolpert 2001-08-23 22:27:29 Re: Re: [JDBC] New backend functions? [was Re: JDBC ch
Previous Message Rene Pijlman 2001-08-23 21:37:27 Re: [PATCHES] JDBC patch for util.Serialize and jdbc2.PreparedStatement