Re: Why JDBC 1?

From: Dave Cramer <Dave(at)micro-automation(dot)net>
To: Rene Pijlman <rene(at)lab(dot)applinet(dot)nl>
Cc: pgsql-jdbc(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Why JDBC 1?
Date: 2001-09-04 17:22:33
Message-ID: 999624153.1559.12.camel@inspiron.cramers
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-jdbc

Yes, it is, but many of the libraries, and methods which are used in
version 2 of the driver aren't available in jdk1 so it won't compile or
run.

Dave
On Tue, 2001-09-04 at 12:50, Rene Pijlman wrote:
> Perhaps this is a silly question, but why do we have separate
> JDBC 1 and 2 drivers?
>
> Isn't the JDBC 2 driver also an implementation of JDBC 1?
>
> Regards,
> René Pijlman <rene(at)lab(dot)applinet(dot)nl>
>
> ---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
> TIP 4: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster
>
>

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-jdbc by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message chris markiewicz 2001-09-04 17:39:36 Re: error - NOTICE: current transaction...MORE DETAIL...
Previous Message Dave Cramer 2001-09-04 17:20:41 Re: Read transactions don't work on 7.0.x db's 2nd patch