Re: Timestamp Summary

Hi Dave,

I thought I addressed that in the long paragraph near the bottom of this
message.

http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-jdbc/2005-07/msg00283.php

This seems to me that it doesn't require any new datatypes and doesn't
require that we know the type on the server side ahead of time. Am I
missing something?

-Kevin


>>> Dave Cramer <davec(at)postgresintl(dot)com> 07/25/05 1:43 PM >>>

The challenge with this, is that we don't know ahead of time what
type the
underlying data is. If we did this is a trivial problem. Right now we
bind the
parameter in the statement to a timestamptz type. If we knew ahead of
time, we
could easily bind it to a timestamp.

The simplest solution that Christian has is to create two types that
extend PGobject and do exactly as above.