Kris Jurka wrote:
> I think this is a good idea, but I would include a link to JDBC4 as well
> because despite our poor support it is the way of the future.
> I hoping we fold in the copy stuff so that disappears and until we have
> some actual documentation/experience with the statement caching version,
> I'm not sure how prominently I would like to promote it.
I reduced that to just mentioning the extras page. Or should i remove it
> Yeah, since we don't even maintain 7.X anymore, mentioning 6.X and 0.2
> is a little pointless.
There are two tables now, supported versions and archived versions. Is
the split ok?
In response to
pgsql-jdbc by date
|Next:||From: Kris Jurka||Date: 2007-10-07 19:48:53|
|Subject: Re: [BUGS] BUG #2856: Jdbc 4 connector running on JDK 1.6
|Previous:||From: Dave Cramer||Date: 2007-10-05 13:08:24|
|Subject: Re: statement caching link on jdbc page|