Hi Kris
> 1111 = Types.OTHER. We could consider resolving domains to their base
> types and reporting that as the sql type. That seems like it would be
> helpful in this situation.
I figured this one out sometime later :-) I ignored Types.OTHER when I
originaly wrote the code on the basis that I didn't know what it was for -
always a mistake.
>> So far I've tried using the "SOURCE_DATA_TYPE" column of the result set
>> returned by getColumns but this column doesn't exist.
>
> This is an addition in the JDBC 3 spec that we haven't gotten around to
> adding as right now we only return JDBC 2 info. This obviously makes my
> previous suggestion obsolete and we should just implement this. This
> looks like a pretty easy thing to do except for the fact that we haven't
> yet dealt with how to return different information for JDBC 2/3 drivers
> without a lot of code duplication.
If I can use getUDT I'll be satisfied with that for the time being, but
SOURCE_DATA_TYPE would certainly be much more convenient.
I expect this question has been asked before but is there any reason why I
shouldn't use the newer driver (for v8) with 7.4.6? I assume that it would
allow me to use the getUDT method if I did that.
Thanks
Iain
