From: | Kris Jurka <books(at)ejurka(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | "Jaroslaw J(dot) Pyszny" <arghil(at)poczta(dot)onet(dot)pl> |
Cc: | pg(at)fastcrypt(dot)com, pgsql-jdbc <pgsql-jdbc(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Auto-increment serial (Postgresql JDBC driver w/ |
Date: | 2004-09-23 05:40:42 |
Message-ID: | Pine.BSO.4.56.0409230028320.28320@leary.csoft.net |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-jdbc |
On Wed, 23 Sep 2004, Jaroslaw J. Pyszny wrote:
> W licie z sro, 22-09-2004, godz. 21:59, Kris Jurka pisze:
> > On Wed, 22 Sep 2004, Jaroslaw J. Pyszny wrote:
> [...]
>
> second patch
>
I've applied the ResultSetMetaData.isAutoIncrement part of this patch, but
you changed what you were doing in DatabaseMetaData and I wanted to
discuss that first. Now you are adding the serial pseudotypes to the
getTypeInfo results.
1) With the addition of the new types, should we only return true for
AUTO_INCREMENT on the serial types and not the integer types?
2) Is it necessary to return all four versions of the types (serial,
serial4, bigserial, and serial8)? To me this seems to just add confusion
and perhaps we should just pick a pair of these to use.
3) If we are going to add these as valid types, it seems we should alter
DatabaseMetaData.getColumns to return "serial" for the TYPE_NAME column as
well.
Kris Jurka
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Kris Jurka | 2004-09-23 07:09:33 | Re: raising the default prepareTheshold |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2004-09-23 04:02:15 | Re: [JDBC] Char(100) fields |