From: | Kris Jurka <books(at)ejurka(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | David Goodenough <david(dot)goodenough(at)btconnect(dot)com>, pgsql-jdbc(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Support for ResultSetMetaData.getTableName |
Date: | 2007-08-27 05:53:12 |
Message-ID: | Pine.BSO.4.64.0708270140030.23186@leary.csoft.net |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-jdbc |
On Mon, 27 Aug 2007, Tom Lane wrote:
> I suggest that the following mapping might be more sensible:
>
> getColumnName returns "a"
> getTableName returns "c"
> getSchemaName returns name of c's schema
> getColumnLabel returns "b"
>
> where the first three fail if the SELECT column isn't a simple column
> reference, but getColumnLabel always works.
>
I tried that back here:
http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-jdbc/2004-07/threads.php#00314
and continuing here:
http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-jdbc/2004-08/threads.php#00008
This message demonstrates that many other drivers do Column Name/Label in
a different way:
http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-jdbc/2004-08/msg00012.php
So while I agree with you that the above suggestions make sense from a
blank slate, we can't do this without causing problems. It seems people
would like us to fallback from our position of table and schema returning
aliases, which while inconsistent, is certainly more useful at this point
in time.
Kris Jurka
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Marek Lewczuk | 2007-08-27 07:35:54 | small correction to AbstractJdbc2Array |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2007-08-27 05:31:16 | Re: Support for ResultSetMetaData.getTableName |