Re: AbstractJdbc2Array - another patch - Mailing list pgsql-jdbc

From Kris Jurka
Subject Re: AbstractJdbc2Array - another patch
Date
Msg-id Pine.BSO.4.64.0710281511210.31092@leary.csoft.net
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: AbstractJdbc2Array - another patch  (Marek Lewczuk <newsy@lewczuk.com>)
Responses Re: AbstractJdbc2Array - another patch  (Marek Lewczuk <newsy@lewczuk.com>)
Re: AbstractJdbc2Array - another patch  (Marek Lewczuk <newsy@lewczuk.com>)
Re: AbstractJdbc2Array - another patch  (Marek Lewczuk <newsy@lewczuk.com>)
List pgsql-jdbc

On Fri, 26 Oct 2007, Marek Lewczuk wrote:

> I still think that we should add base type arrays into Oid class - it will
> work much faster and will be appropriate cause Oid class already contains
> base types, so it is logical to put there base type arrays too. For user
> defined types I would provide a way to fetch oid from pg_type - but for now
> user defined types are not supported. However, if you really think that we
> should fetch oid for every array type then I'm able to do it but in my
> opinion we should stick with Oid class for now (only for base types).
>

This makes sense to me, static data for known types, dynamic for unknown.

Kris Jurka

pgsql-jdbc by date:

Previous
From: "Peter Kovacs"
Date:
Subject: Re: JPA and Postgresql
Next
From: "cncinfo@126.com"
Date:
Subject: about function overload,a bug?