Meta Information about columns of a domain datatype ? - Mailing list pgsql-jdbc

From j.random.programmer
Subject Meta Information about columns of a domain datatype ?
Date
Msg-id 20060616075455.37486.qmail@web32012.mail.mud.yahoo.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: 8.2dev-500.jdbc3 driver: PreparedStatement.toString()  (Oliver Jowett <oliver@opencloud.com>)
Responses Re: Meta Information about columns of a domain datatype ?
List pgsql-jdbc
Hi:

I am using the LATEST postgres 8 JDBC driver against
PostgresQL 8.1.x.

I have a O/R mapping tool that uses JDBC meta data to
generate Java
code. When using tables with a column whose datatype
is a domain,
the driver returns a typecode of 1111 (other).

Is there anyway to get information about the domain ?

I've tried
a) calling DataBaseMetaData.getAttributes(..)  but
it's not implemented.
b) DataBaseMetaData.getUDTs(...) is not helpful
either.

A similar question was posted on this list about 18
months ago.

     * Subject: meta data information returned for
domains
     * Date: Fri, 3 Dec 2004 12:13:13 +0900

However, there wasn't a resolution then.

Is this problem solved/fixable ? Any suggestions ?

Here is the specific SQL.
--------------------------------------------------------
CREATE DOMAIN sex AS CHARACTER(1) CHECK (VALUE in
('m', 'f'));

CREATE TABLE subject (
    subject_id SERIAL CONSTRAINT NN_subject_id NOT
NULL,
    fname CHARACTER VARYING(99),
    lname CHARACTER VARYING(99) CONSTRAINT NN_lname
NOT NULL,
    dob DATE,
    sex sex CONSTRAINT NN_sex NOT NULL,
    CONSTRAINT PK_subject PRIMARY KEY (subject_id)
);
------------------------------------------------------

It all breaks for the 'sex' column. (and no, not using
domains is
not an option since the actual database is very very
complex).

:-)

Best regards,
--j



__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com

pgsql-jdbc by date:

Previous
From: "sathish"
Date:
Subject: concurrency problem
Next
From: Dave Cramer
Date:
Subject: Re: concurrency problem