[Sorry for being late to the party, travelling does take away too much time sometimes.]
On 19.05.2015 21:04, Greg Sabino Mullane wrote: > Bruno Harbulot asked for a devil's advocate by saying: >> My main point was that this is not specific to JDBC. Considering that even >> PostgreSQL's own ECPG is affected, the issue goes probably deeper than it >> seems. I'm just not convinced that passing the problem onto connectors, >> libraries and ultimately application developers is the right thing to do >> here. > > Well, one could argue that it *is* their problem, as they should be using > the standard Postgres way for placeholders, which is $1, $2, $3... As Bruno already pointed out one could also argue that they just try to accept what the standard asked them for. I fail to see how such a way of arguing brings us closer to a solution, though. Michael -- Michael Meskes Michael at Fam-Meskes dot De, Michael at Meskes dot (De|Com|Net|Org) Meskes at (Debian|Postgresql) dot Org Jabber: michael.meskes at gmail dot com VfL Borussia! Força Barça! Go SF 49ers! Use Debian GNU/Linux, PostgreSQL -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
