Re: JDBC driver and Postgres 9.6beta

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Dave Cramer <pg(at)fastcrypt(dot)com>
Cc: Vladimir Sitnikov <sitnikov(dot)vladimir(at)gmail(dot)com>, Thomas Kellerer <spam_eater(at)gmx(dot)net>, List <pgsql-jdbc(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: JDBC driver and Postgres 9.6beta
Date: 2016-05-14 14:49:28
Message-ID: 24504.1463237368@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-jdbc

Dave Cramer <pg(at)fastcrypt(dot)com> writes:
> On 14 May 2016 at 10:33, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
>> Using pg_get_indexdef() would leave you much less vulnerable to cross-
>> version differences in the system catalogs.

> That means parsing the response..

True. If it seems like too much churn, I think you wouldn't go very far
wrong by assuming that ASC/DESC is only relevant to btree indexes.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Browse pgsql-jdbc by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Thomas Kellerer 2016-05-17 06:10:53 Re: JDBC driver and Postgres 9.6beta
Previous Message Dave Cramer 2016-05-14 14:41:27 Re: JDBC driver and Postgres 9.6beta