| From: | Joseph Shraibman <jks(at)selectacast(dot)net> |
|---|---|
| To: | Oliver Jowett <oliver(at)opencloud(dot)com> |
| Cc: | pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org, pgsql-jdbc(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: [JDBC] pg_locks.transaction field type |
| Date: | 2005-08-18 03:48:52 |
| Message-ID: | 43040524.8060901@selectacast.net |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general pgsql-jdbc |
Oliver Jowett wrote:
> Joseph Shraibman wrote:
>
>> Is it a jdbc bug that is returning the answer as
>> org.postgresql.util.PGobject instead of some kind of Number?
>
>
> The column's type is 'xid' which the driver doesn't currently handle, so
> it gets put into the "wrap it in PGobject" bucket.
Is xid a type of number?
>
> I'm not sure what's changed between 7.4 & 8.0 -- did you also change
> JDBC driver versions?
yes
>
> Perhaps your server should convert instances of PGobject to their string
> representations before returning them across RMI.
That's what I'll do. Are there any other classes besides
org.postgresql.util.PGobject that I have to worry about?
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Oliver Jowett | 2005-08-18 03:55:43 | Re: [JDBC] pg_locks.transaction field type |
| Previous Message | Oliver Jowett | 2005-08-18 03:27:33 | Re: [JDBC] pg_locks.transaction field type |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Oliver Jowett | 2005-08-18 03:55:43 | Re: [JDBC] pg_locks.transaction field type |
| Previous Message | Oliver Jowett | 2005-08-18 03:27:33 | Re: [JDBC] pg_locks.transaction field type |