Re: JDBC: why is PGobject class instead of interface? - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Holger Krug
Subject Re: JDBC: why is PGobject class instead of interface?
Date
Msg-id 20020108161124.A9186@dev12.rationalizer.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to JDBC: why is PGobject class instead of interface?  (Bear Giles <bear@coyotesong.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Sun, Jan 06, 2002 at 05:00:35PM -0700, Bear Giles wrote:
> I can implement the mapping by casting between the objects and text,
> but if a type extension mechanism is available it would be nice to be
> able to hide those details from the user.

The type extension mechanism inherent in JDBC is provided by an
implementation of java.sql.Connection.setTypeMap(Map map) and related
methods. The PostgreSQL JDBC driver has not yet got this feature. I
think it would be fine if somebody would add this to PostgreSQL ;-)

-- 
Holger Krug
hkrug@rationalizer.com


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Holger Krug
Date:
Subject: Re: Time as keyword
Next
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Finally ready to go for RC1?