On Mon, Mar 7, 2016 at 11:18 PM, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > Craig Ringer <cr...@2ndquadrant.com> writes: >> On 8 March 2016 at 08:56, Igal @ Lucee.org <i...@lucee.org> wrote: >>> I'm not sure why it was not accepted at the end? > >> The biggest issue, though it might not be clear from that thread, is that >> what exactly it means to "return generated keys" is poorly defined by JDBC, >> and not necessarily the same thing as "return the PRIMARY KEY". >> >> Should we return the DEFAULT on a UNIQUE column, for example? >> >> IMO other vendors' drivers should be tested for behaviour in a variety of >> cases. > > Yeah. It was asserted in the earlier thread that other vendors implement > this feature as "return the pkey", but that seems to conflict with the > plain language of the JDBC spec: generated columns are an entirely > different thing than primary key columns. So really what I'd like to see > is some work on surveying other implementations to confirm exactly what > behavior they implement. If we're to go against what the spec seems to > say, I want to see a whole lot of evidence that other people do it > consistently in a different way.
I agree that some research should be done on how this works in other systems, but I think we have a general problem with the server lacking certain capabilities that make it easy to implement a high-quality JDBC driver. And I think it would be good to work on figuring out how to fix that. I feel that some of the replies on this thread were rather hostile considering that the goal -- good connectors for the database server -- is extremely important. -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (firstname.lastname@example.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers