Re: pgjdbc-ng
| От | Kevin Wooten |
|---|---|
| Тема | Re: pgjdbc-ng |
| Дата | |
| Msg-id | DE99AEC0-911E-46F9-9619-D9867C4CC43B@me.com обсуждение исходный текст |
| Ответ на | Re: pgjdbc-ng (Guillaume Smet <guillaume.smet@gmail.com>) |
| Ответы |
Re: pgjdbc-ng
|
| Список | pgsql-jdbc |
I will look into support for 9.1. I started with 9.2 purely because it was the latest release at the time and I thoughtit would take a whole lot longer to get to where we are at. On Feb 25, 2014, at 8:12 AM, Guillaume Smet <guillaume.smet@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi Heikki, > > On Tue, Feb 25, 2014 at 4:01 PM, Heikki Linnakangas > <hlinnakangas@vmware.com> wrote: >> That should be easy to fix. Looking at PGtype, where the query is coming >> from, all you need to do is add another version of the query without the >> reference to pg_range. The logic for sending a different version of the >> query depending on the server version is already there. > > I haven't taken a look at the code because IIRC they didn't want to > bloat the driver with support for old versions. > > From my point of view, 9.1 would be the perfect starting point as it's > still widely in production and it will probably stay that way for a > while. But there may be good reasons to not support it. > > If support for 9.1 is something they are interested in, we can take a > look at it. Just ping me. > > -- > Guillaume
В списке pgsql-jdbc по дате отправления: