Tom Lane wrote:
> "Dave Page" <dpage@vale-housing.co.uk> writes:
>
>>What about the addition of pg_attribute.attrelid &
>>pg_attribute.attname/attnum in RowDesription messages to identify the
>>underlying attribute (where appropriate)?
>
> Well, we can talk about it, but I still think that any frontend that
> relies on such information is broken by design. (And if that means the
> JDBC spec is broken, then the JDBC spec is broken.)
>
> Just to start with, if I do "SELECT * FROM view", am I going to see the
> info associated with the view column, or with the hypothetical
> underlying table column? (Actually, didn't I already make a list of a
> bunch of ways in which this concept is underspecified? AFAIR, you
> didn't suggest answers to any of those questions ... but we need answers
> to all of them if we are going to implement the feature.)
The problem Dave is suggesting this as a first attempt at a solution for
is that with ODBC, a frontend (i.e. OpenOffice) asks the ODBC driver
which columns are NULLable, etc. And the ODBC driver is getting the
info wrong, then passing back the incorrect info.
So, when a person goes to insert a row into a table with a
SERIAL/SEQUENCE based column, OpenOffice has been told the column isn't
NULLable and forces the user to enter a value. Voila, it doesn't work
with sequences. :(
It's likely possible to add to the ODBC driver some way of getting the
info right, but Dave is also looking for a way of making this easier
into the future for similar problems. i.e. Let the database explicitly
have info about what each column can do.
That's my understanding of it anyway.
:-)
Regards and best wishes,
Justin Clift
> regards, tom lane
--
"My grandfather once told me that there are two kinds of people: those
who work and those who take the credit. He told me to try to be in the
first group; there was less competition there."
- Indira Gandhi
