Barry Lind <barry@xythos.com> writes:
> The other reason I don't like returning a result set directly from
> getObject is that it doesn't seem to follow the same pattern as all the
> other objects that are being returned. You are losing the distinction
> that the refcursor is a pointer to a result set, not the actual result
> set itself.
>
> Finally, does anyone know how other databases' jdbc drivers deal with
> this type of functionality? I would rather try to follow an existing
> example of how someone else has done this then to go it alone and build
> our own mechanism. Since I know Oracle has refcursors, how does oracle
> expose them through jdbc?
Like I've done it for pgsql.
Ordinarily one register's the out parameter of the proc you are calling
with the Oracle ResultSet implementation class.
> I think a better approach
> would be to return a pg specific object (lets call it PGrefcursor). The
> object would have at least the following two methods: getRefCursorName()
> and getResultSet(). The reason I think this is a better approach is
> then you can turn around and use the PGrefcursor object on a setObject()
> call to bind the refcursor to a different function call. So you can
> have a function that returns a refcursor and another that takes a
> refcursor and you can get the refcursor object from one call and pass it
> onto the other.
Of course, that's a good approach too... but doesn't getting the
ResultSet directly makes it clear(er) that the new ResultSet is part
of the same transaction.
Nic