Re: Avoiding explicit addDataType calls for PostGIS
От | Markus Schaber |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Avoiding explicit addDataType calls for PostGIS |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 20041103122816.1c6ab2de@kingfisher.intern.logi-track.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Avoiding explicit addDataType calls for PostGIS (Oliver Jowett <oliver@opencloud.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: Avoiding explicit addDataType calls for PostGIS
|
Список | pgsql-jdbc |
Hi, Oliver, On Wed, 20 Oct 2004 10:36:39 +1300 Oliver Jowett <oliver@opencloud.com> wrote: > > 1) Is the name postgresql.properties with no package name a good idea? It > > doesn't seem ideal for an application to have to create an org/postgresql > > directory just to hold a properties file, > > Yes, that's what I was trying to avoid. But, usually, it will be extension and library writers and not the application writers that provide the postgresql.properties file. I think most applications will use URL or Properties to express their specific wishes. So I'd prefer to put it into org/postgresql. > For the datatype.* properties, how do we map them to datasource > accessors? Having many separate properties is nice from the point of > view of being able to incrementally add to the property via different > defaults files, but it's nasty to map to a JavaBean-like accessors (and > also makes Driver.getPropertyInfo() impossible to completely implement). Well, we could get nearer to a perfect getPropertyInfo() when we take all the datatype.* declarations we read from the properties files. This way, any extension completes the list with its own datatypes, and a developer / admin can add further ones if needed. (Maybe we should allow empty datatypes.type declarations for this case). > Perhaps an array-based accessor, one element per datatype? Or a Map, so we can index via name. > Alternatively, collapse all the datatype stuff down to a single property > and teach the property-munging code how to merge (rather than replace) > multiple settings of that property together. (this second option is more > like what JNDI property files do) This sounds cleaner, IMHO. This would produce (and allow) to specify something like datatypes=geom:org.postgis.PGgeometry,blubb=com.foo.bar Should I try to change the patch this way? Thanks, Markus -- markus schaber | dipl. informatiker logi-track ag | rennweg 14-16 | ch 8001 zürich phone +41-43-888 62 52 | fax +41-43-888 62 53 mailto:schabios@logi-track.com | www.logi-track.com
В списке pgsql-jdbc по дате отправления: