Re: Register arbitrary types Framework
| От | Kris Jurka |
|---|---|
| Тема | Re: Register arbitrary types Framework |
| Дата | |
| Msg-id | Pine.BSO.4.56.0403170222470.26091@leary.csoft.net обсуждение исходный текст |
| Ответ на | Re: Register arbitrary types Framework (Kris Jurka <books@ejurka.com>) |
| Ответы |
Re: Register arbitrary types Framework
|
| Список | pgsql-jdbc |
[Discussing not having ResultSet.getObject return a PGObject] I did not receive your reply through the list for some reason, but I stumbled across it in the archives: http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-jdbc/2004-03/msg00067.php I asked what about symmetry with setObject and you replied, But this problem is why I prefer the second solution using factories although it is more work to start with. The factory instances basically have 2 methods - one for reading and another one for writing. With getObject you can register the factory with a pg internal type name that the driver knows, but with setObject you have nothing to determine which (if any) factory to use other than the object itself. You could work on some kind of reflection based scheme, but this is certainly not symmetric with how getObject works. Kris Jurka
В списке pgsql-jdbc по дате отправления: