Re: Versioning policy PgJDBC - discussion

From: Brad DeJong <Brad(dot)Dejong(at)infor(dot)com>
To: Vladimir Sitnikov <sitnikov(dot)vladimir(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: List <pgsql-jdbc(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Gavin Flower <GavinFlower(at)archidevsys(dot)co(dot)nz>, Dave Cramer <pg(at)fastcrypt(dot)com>, Jorge Solórzano <jorsol(at)gmail(dot)com>
Subject: Re: Versioning policy PgJDBC - discussion
Date: 2016-11-29 06:19:21
Message-ID: F8F0ED16CB59F247B7EFD0E1DB34BC1F5CB5AA30@USALWEXMBX3.infor.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-jdbc

Vladimir wrote:
> Well, current milestone has slipped a bit
> https://github.com/pgjdbc/pgjdbc/milestones, however there are just a
> couple of issues due.
> https://github.com/pgjdbc/pgjdbc/pull/690 "executeBatch vs
> serverprepared=0" -- needs review
> https://github.com/pgjdbc/pgjdbc/pull/611 "feat: allow byte[] and String to
> be accessed as .getLob, and .getClob" -- test should be reviewed (e.g.
> assert messages added)

I read this as a request for assistance in reviewing these pulls. I looked over the byte[]/Blob part of pull 611 (PgByteaBlob and PgByteaBlobTest) and submitted comments. AbstractBasicLob and PgResultSet changes look good. I did not look over the String/Clob part yet.

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-jdbc by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Dave Cramer 2016-11-29 11:42:57 Re: Versioning policy PgJDBC - discussion
Previous Message Vladimir Sitnikov 2016-11-28 21:17:30 Re: Versioning policy PgJDBC - discussion