Re: AbstractJdbc2Array - another patch
| От | Kris Jurka |
|---|---|
| Тема | Re: AbstractJdbc2Array - another patch |
| Дата | |
| Msg-id | Pine.BSO.4.64.0710281511210.31092@leary.csoft.net обсуждение исходный текст |
| Ответ на | Re: AbstractJdbc2Array - another patch (Marek Lewczuk <newsy@lewczuk.com>) |
| Ответы |
Re: AbstractJdbc2Array - another patch
Re: AbstractJdbc2Array - another patch Re: AbstractJdbc2Array - another patch |
| Список | pgsql-jdbc |
On Fri, 26 Oct 2007, Marek Lewczuk wrote: > I still think that we should add base type arrays into Oid class - it will > work much faster and will be appropriate cause Oid class already contains > base types, so it is logical to put there base type arrays too. For user > defined types I would provide a way to fetch oid from pg_type - but for now > user defined types are not supported. However, if you really think that we > should fetch oid for every array type then I'm able to do it but in my > opinion we should stick with Oid class for now (only for base types). > This makes sense to me, static data for known types, dynamic for unknown. Kris Jurka
В списке pgsql-jdbc по дате отправления: