and IMO the standard definition (like "postgres") should be taken. I would
prefer, if the user would be able to specify a more detailed definition like
"postgres81" , instead of having to override their own schema (and there are
some minor changes between the revisions).

Historically, we've put various compatibility properties into the
particular dictionary class. Any public fields or setter / getter
pairs can be accessed from the DBDictionary configuration:

   openjpa.DBDictionary: postgres(supportsSubqueries=false)

for example. We haven't usually done version numbers, since desired
settings are really normally more of a version range, not a particular
number. But, I could definitely see a case for something like so:

   openjpa.DBDictionary: postgres(version=8.0)

Then, in the DBDictionary, various behaviors could be toggled based on
the fact that the person is using a version < 8.1, for example.

Generally

On 7/9/07, Daniel Migowski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

 Hello OpenJPA developers,

 I fixed some bugs in the Postgresqldatabase definition, and before
submitting a patch, i wanted to know how support for different database
versions is planned. Should the only be one definition per database or will
the future bring definitions like postgres81, postgres80 etc.. I know that
the automatic detection of a version is not possible directly from JDBC-URL,
and IMO the standard definition (like "postgres") should be taken. I would
prefer, if the user would be able to specify a more detailed definition like
"postgres81" , instead of having to override their own schema (and there are
some minor changes between the revisions).

 What you think?

 With regards,
 Daniel Migowski


--
 |¯¯|¯¯| IKOffice GmbH Daniel Migowski
 | | |/| Mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 | | // | Nordstr. 10 Tel.: +49 (441) 21 98 89 52
 | | \\ | 26135 Oldenburg Fax.: +49 (441) 21 98 89 55
 |__|__|\| http://www.ikoffice.de Mob.: +49 (176) 22 31 20 76

 Geschäftsführer: Ingo Kuhlmann, Daniel Migowski
 Amtsgericht Oldenburg, HRB 201467
 Steuernummer: 64/211/01864



--
Patrick Linskey
202 669 5907

Reply via email to