PostgreSQL JDBC - Re: Bug: Driver(8.2dev-500.jdbc3) does not handle

Author

Re: Bug: Driver(8.2dev-500.jdbc3) does not handle

Csaba Nagy

2005-12-21, 7:24 am

& #91;snip]
> Another possible mapping would be to/from a Java boolean array. This has
> the problem that a Java array of booleans passed to setObject() should
> probably be mapped to an array of booleans on the server side, not to a
> bit(n) type.

What about a java.util.BitSet ? Or does it have to extend PGObject ?

Cheers,
Csaba.

---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 1: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate
subscribe-nomail command to majordomo@postgresql
.org so that your
message can get through to the mailing list cleanly

Markus Schaber

2005-12-21, 7:24 am

Hi, Csaba,

Csaba Nagy wrote:

>
> What about a java.util.BitSet ? Or does it have to extend PGObject ?

Currently, all Objects have either to be special cased inside the
driver, or extend PGObject (which does not allow binary transfer).

There were several ideas to change this, but AFAIR none of them was
implemented.

Markus

--
Markus Schaber | Logical Tracking&Tracing International AG
Dipl. Inf. | Software Development GIS

Fight against software patents in EU! www.ffii.org www.nosoftwarepatents.org

---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 2: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster

Oliver Jowett

2005-12-21, 7:24 am

Csaba Nagy wrote:
> [snip]
>
>
>
> What about a java.util.BitSet ? Or does it have to extend PGObject ?

BitSet would work. The only real reason to extend PGobject is so you can
implement support for extra types without modifying the driver itself.

-O

---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 9: In versions below 8.0, the planner will ignore your desire to
choose an index scan if your joining column's datatypes do not
match

Sponsored Links