Re: JDBC, prepared queries, and partitioning

From: Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
To: Oliver Jowett <oliver(at)opencloud(dot)com>
Cc: josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com, Stephen Denne <Stephen(dot)Denne(at)datamail(dot)co(dot)nz>, Kris Jurka <books(at)ejurka(dot)com>, PostgreSQL - JDBC <pgsql-jdbc(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: JDBC, prepared queries, and partitioning
Date: 2008-02-14 13:04:19
Message-ID: 1202994259.16770.640.camel@ebony.site
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-jdbc

On Fri, 2008-02-15 at 01:22 +1300, Oliver Jowett wrote:
> Simon Riggs wrote:
>
> > Why not just fold in parameters if option is set and can continue to use
> > normal V3 route, just with zero parameters? Any JDBC calls that want to
> > inspect parameters can throw an exception when the option is set. So
> > JDBC thinks there were parameters, yet Postgres server thinks there were
> > no parameters.
>
> Well, yes, that's essentially how our protocol-level abstraction works -
> the main driver deals in terms of abstracted Query and ParameterList
> objects, and the protocol layer maps those to something the server
> understands. This is how we support the v2 and v3 protocols in the same
> driver. I was suggesting a third protocol path ("v3simple" or something)
> that did pretty much what you described .. but I fear you are
> underestimating the work needed to implement it.

OK, I'll spend the time on providing server-side facilities in the next
release. That way we won't need to do the driver side work at all.

--
Simon Riggs
2ndQuadrant http://www.2ndQuadrant.com

In response to

Browse pgsql-jdbc by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message james 2008-02-14 23:36:19 PSQLException: ResultSet not positioned properly
Previous Message Oliver Jowett 2008-02-14 12:45:12 Re: SMALLINT vs short or... int?