Lance J. Andersen wrote: > Very simple, just because it is deprecated, it does not mean it can be > ignored. Bottom line, it is required to be there.
According to which section of JDBC 3.0? Dan.
Lance J. Andersen wrote: > Very simple, just because it is deprecated, it does not mean it can be > ignored. Bottom line, it is required to be there.
According to which section of JDBC 3.0? Dan.