Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: [HACKERS] Improved JDBC driver part 2

From: Lew <noone(at)lewscanon(dot)com>
To: pgsql-jdbc(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Improved JDBC driver part 2
Date: 2010-12-01 12:27:59
Message-ID: id5f0c$mr8$ (view raw, whole thread or download thread mbox)
Lists: pgsql-hackerspgsql-jdbc
Magnus Hagander wrote:
> Is there any particular reason why this work can't be maintained as a
> branch to the main driver? My understanding is your work is based off
> that one? Being able to work like that would make things a lot easier
> to review.
> That said, such a process would also be a lot easier if the JDBC
> driver wasn't in cvs ;)

Why is that a problem?


In response to


pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Marko TiikkajaDate: 2010-12-01 13:11:25
Subject: Re: DELETE with LIMIT (or my first hack)
Previous:From: Heikki LinnakangasDate: 2010-12-01 12:23:32
Subject: Re: Hi- How frequently Postgres Poll for trigger file

pgsql-jdbc by date

Next:From: Radosław SmoguraDate: 2010-12-01 13:59:39
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Improved JDBC driver part 2
Previous:From: Magnus HaganderDate: 2010-12-01 11:47:13
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Improved JDBC driver part 2

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2018 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group