Re: Re: JDBC 2.0 conformance, documentation and todo list

From: Barry Lind <barry(at)xythos(dot)com>
To: Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>
Cc: Rene Pijlman <rpijlman(at)wanadoo(dot)nl>, pgsql-jdbc(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Re: JDBC 2.0 conformance, documentation and todo list
Date: 2001-08-10 16:36:50
Message-ID: 3B740DA2.1020500@xythos.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-jdbc

OK, I didn't realize that schema support was part of entry level.
Given that it is, I agree that 'false' is a better response at this
time. However after schema support is added in 7.3 (hopefully), then I
would like this to be 'true'. Or are their other large features like
this missing from postgres that are part of entry level 92 that I am not
aware of?

I will submit a patch to add comments to the code reflecting this
discussion.

thanks,
--Barry

Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> Barry Lind writes:
>
>
>> I don't see any problem with claiming support for entry level even
>>though there are a few exceptions.
>>
>
> I might be able to agree if the only exceptions were that we fold
> identifier case the wrong way and have different reserved words, but
> certain things like schemas are rather largish exceptions.
>
> I'm not really sure what the point of this function is anyway. We could
> leave it as "false" perpetually as a means of protest against the
> contortions of the SQL standard. ;-)
>
>

In response to

Browse pgsql-jdbc by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message John Anderson 2001-08-10 17:58:54 Re: tough one
Previous Message Liam Stewart 2001-08-10 15:07:45 DatabaseMetaData