Heh. I wasn't aware that JDBC proposes a standard mapping. Though who's that new-fangled "JDBC" to establish a standard in database design ;-P
More seriously, since Jooq's mission is "database first", JDBC conventions are probably not an authoritative source for DB encoding conventions. I agree that in the absence of a standard encoding, you'd always need a Jooq converter, so a standard encoding could be useful. On the other hand, standard conventions like that have been eating incredible amounts of debugging time whenever they did not do exactly the right thing, so I'm generally not too happy about them. That's a design trade-off, of course, and YMMV. Regards, Jo -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "jOOQ User Group" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
