Tom Lane wrote:
>AFAICS you are choosing to do things in the hardest possible way, on
>the basis of completely unfounded suppositions about performance gains.
>I recommend the KISS principle. Leave the jar files as jars and let the
>Java runtime system manage them.
>
>
If that was an option, believe me, I would. The current implementation
was not designed and implemented due to my lack of understanding of the
loader mechanisms already present in the runtime. The Java runtime
system just does'nt provide a ClassLoader that can be made to follow the
semantics stipulated by the SQL 2003 Java mapping. That was the major
reason.
I have a well functioning solution. The only lacking part is how to
prevent arbitrary user access to the underlying table. I'd really like
your advice on how to do that.
Regards,
Thomas Hallgren
