Thread: JDBC 3.0

JDBC 3.0

From
"Joe Shevland"
Date:
I've built a JDBC 3 driver from the current CVS sources (added a org.postgresql.jdbc3 package and some changes to
build.xml).Its mainly just placeholder methods. I think someone else might have submitted a patch for this though, but
Ican put up a link for a context diff. Otherwise, the additions to the PGBlob and PGClob classes for JDBC 3.0 might be
worthwhile.

The xa.ClientConnection class implements java.sql.Connection though (added some more placeholder methods), so I think
thismay need to be split into JDBC 2 and 3 parts as well, as you can't add the JDBC 3 methods that require types like
java.sql.Savepointfor JDBC 2 only builds. 

Cheers,
Joe

------------------------------------------------------------
Joe Shevland                           jshevland@j-elite.com
Tasmania, Australia                   http://www.j-elite.com

Member, Systems Administrators Guild of Australia.
------------------------------------------------------------


Re: JDBC 3.0

From
Dave Cramer
Date:
Joe,

Can you send the context diff to the list?

Dave
On Wed, 2002-05-01 at 22:09, Joe Shevland wrote:
> I've built a JDBC 3 driver from the current CVS sources (added a org.postgresql.jdbc3 package and some changes to
build.xml).Its mainly just placeholder methods. I think someone else might have submitted a patch for this though, but
Ican put up a link for a context diff. Otherwise, the additions to the PGBlob and PGClob classes for JDBC 3.0 might be
worthwhile.
>
> The xa.ClientConnection class implements java.sql.Connection though (added some more placeholder methods), so I think
thismay need to be split into JDBC 2 and 3 parts as well, as you can't add the JDBC 3 methods that require types like
java.sql.Savepointfor JDBC 2 only builds. 
>
> Cheers,
> Joe
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------
> Joe Shevland                           jshevland@j-elite.com
> Tasmania, Australia                   http://www.j-elite.com
>
> Member, Systems Administrators Guild of Australia.
> ------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
> ---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
> TIP 5: Have you checked our extensive FAQ?
>
> http://www.postgresql.org/users-lounge/docs/faq.html
>
>




Re: JDBC 3.0

From
"Joe Shevland"
Date:
Here's a link:

http://www.j-elite.com/pgsql/tmp/jdbc3.tgz

Its about ~22k compressed. It could be a little ugly though: its the output of the diff command run from WinCVS, so I'm
notsure if its that clean. If there are space/tab probs etc I'll make the changes on the bsd box lurking under the
tableand get a better diff. 

Also, this can't be applied on top of everything and just work, I'm fairly sure the methods added to
xa.ClientConnectionwill break earlier jdbc builds. I didn't check whether the xa package was built conditionally, maybe
wecould swap in the appropriate class in a similar way to Driver.java.in. I also changed the 'test' target to
'test-jdbc2',and haven't added any tests yet. 

Joe

> -----Original Message-----
> From: pgsql-jdbc-owner@postgresql.org
> [mailto:pgsql-jdbc-owner@postgresql.org]On Behalf Of Dave Cramer
> Sent: Thursday, 2 May 2002 12:31
> To: Joe Shevland
> Cc: pgsql-jdbc@postgresql.org
> Subject: Re: [JDBC] JDBC 3.0
>
>
> Joe,
>
> Can you send the context diff to the list?
>
> Dave
> On Wed, 2002-05-01 at 22:09, Joe Shevland wrote:
> > I've built a JDBC 3 driver from the current CVS sources (added
> a org.postgresql.jdbc3 package and some changes to build.xml).
> Its mainly just placeholder methods. I think someone else might
> have submitted a patch for this though, but I can put up a link
> for a context diff. Otherwise, the additions to the PGBlob and
> PGClob classes for JDBC 3.0 might be worthwhile.


Re: JDBC 3.0

From
"Joe Shevland"
Date:
http://www.j-elite.com/pgsql/tmp/jdbc3.zip

is the actual org.postgresql.jdbc3 source code too... was wondering why the diff was that small.

> Here's a link:
>
> http://www.j-elite.com/pgsql/tmp/jdbc3.tgz
>
> Its about ~22k compressed. It could be a little ugly though: its
> the output of the diff command run from WinCVS, so I'm not sure
> if its that clean. If there are space/tab probs etc I'll make the
> changes on the bsd box lurking under the table and get a better diff.
>