| From: | Oliver Jowett <oliver(at)opencloud(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Fernando Nasser <fnasser(at)redhat(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Dmitry Tkach <dmitry(at)openratings(dot)com>, Kim Ho <kho(at)redhat(dot)com>, Barry Lind <blind(at)xythos(dot)com>, pgsql-jdbc-list <pgsql-jdbc(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Dave Cramer <Dave(at)micro-automation(dot)net> |
| Subject: | IN clauses via setObject(Collection) [Was: Re: Prepared Statements] |
| Date: | 2003-07-21 15:47:49 |
| Message-ID: | 20030721154748.GN2506@opencloud.com |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-jdbc |
On Mon, Jul 21, 2003 at 11:26:11AM -0400, Fernando Nasser wrote:
> I think Dima is arguing that Collection could be treated as an special case
> where it indicates a list of something instead of a single something.
>
> So, we would iterate through this Collection using its iterator and, for
> each Object obtained, act like a setObject has been used with that Object
> and the JAVA TYPE as an argument.
>
> The Types.OTHER is used for database specific SQL types or for Dynamic Data
> Access support. As the Collection class is not a data type there is no
> chance of confusion.
Ya, I understand. My main objection is that setObject(n, object,
Types.INTEGER), in all other cases, means "interpret object as an integer,
or fail if it can't be cast in that way".
-O
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Fernando Nasser | 2003-07-21 15:50:38 | RFC: Removal of support for JDBC1 drivers. |
| Previous Message | Fernando Nasser | 2003-07-21 15:44:41 | Re: patch: clean up ant test infrastructure |