Re: Type cast removal - proposed exceptions for xml,enum

From: Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>
To: Craig Ringer <craig(at)postnewspapers(dot)com(dot)au>
Cc: PG-General Mailing List <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Type cast removal - proposed exceptions for xml,enum
Date: 2010-12-07 17:27:10
Message-ID: 1291742830.5939.0.camel@vanquo.pezone.net
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general

On tis, 2010-12-07 at 11:49 +0800, Craig Ringer wrote:
> This is driving me nuts when working with PgJDBC via various ORM
> layers (I know, I know, but they're life at this point) that would
> work happily with these types if they were implicitly castable to/from
> strings, but don't understand how to explicitly specify these
> postgresql-specific types when talking to the JDBC layer.

Since that is a quite specific use case, why don't you add the casts
yourself?

In response to

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Steve Clark 2010-12-07 17:42:27 Re: dotted quad netmask conversion
Previous Message Frank Jansen 2010-12-07 17:11:05 pgpool slony slaves only