I don't mind. Wrote it to do one particular job, extended its
functionality a couple times, most recently to implement a crude pooling
system. The code needs work (what doesn't when it gets genericised... )
but it'd be a good starting point at least. I own the IP (as much as
anyone owns IP to stu
something maybe that would fit into contrib? :)
On Thu, 23 Aug 2001, Peter Wiley wrote:
>
> I've got a pile of RMI/JDBC code that does something damn close if not
> exactly what you want. Client & server ends. I wrote it to allow
> interactive queries & display the results in a Java applet or a
I've got a pile of RMI/JDBC code that does something damn close if not
exactly what you want. Client & server ends. I wrote it to allow
interactive queries & display the results in a Java applet or application
then extended it to allow interactive and/or batch insert/update/delete
functionality w
have a database behind a firewall ... we'd like to make connections
available to that machine through a machine outside of the firewall, so
that its a secure connection to the "proxy", and in-secure from
proxy->database ...
the 'clients' will be written in java ...
---(
> >
> > What's your thoughts? Do you see the need for the functionality? Do you have
> > a solution that I need?
>
> Definitely need the functionality. It's one of the things holding up me
> porting an Informix system. Laziness is a bigger holdup of course - the
> Informix system is so bulletpr
>
> What's your thoughts? Do you see the need for the functionality? Do you have
> a solution that I need?
Definitely need the functionality. It's one of the things holding up me
porting an Informix system. Laziness is a bigger holdup of course - the
Informix system is so bulletproof and I'm sl
Fred Lucas wrote:
>Is there a way to SELECT tables or create JOINs from multiple databases
>through psql? [...] would this have to be handled programmatically with
>multiple database connections?
Then Rene Pijlman wrote:
>Yes, you need multiple connections for that.
And now Nick writes:
Can you
> The other reason for telling people who are experiencing problems with
> the driver to get the latest version is that their bug has probably
> already been fixed.
>
> However a certain degree of caution should probably be exercised here.
>
The real problem is that I don't remember all the th
The other reason for telling people who are experiencing problems with
the driver to get the latest version is that their bug has probably
already been fixed.
However a certain degree of caution should probably be exercised here.
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAI
>
> I agree with Bruce. I think we are in good shape for 7.2. As long as
> there is an active developer community working on maintaining and
> upgrading the code base there shouldn't be problems.
>
> Once we get the jdbc.postgresql.org website updated then there can be an
> official place t
I agree with Bruce. I think we are in good shape for 7.2. As long as
there is an active developer community working on maintaining and
upgrading the code base there shouldn't be problems.
Once we get the jdbc.postgresql.org website updated then there can be an
official place to post patches
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Actually, it's not a new function on the server... I'm just trying to find a
way to access the getInsertedOID() method in the statement object without
having direct access to the statement object. (My use-case is when the JDBC
driver is wrapped in a
Quoting Peter Eisentraut <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> Tom Lane writes:
>
> > IIRC, at one time ODBC *was* a separate project, and we decided that
> > that wasn't working too well. Anyone recall the reasons we pulled it
> > into the main CVS tree? Wouldn't do to make the same mistakes
> twice...
>
>
Tom Lane writes:
> IIRC, at one time ODBC *was* a separate project, and we decided that
> that wasn't working too well. Anyone recall the reasons we pulled it
> into the main CVS tree? Wouldn't do to make the same mistakes twice...
The ODBC driver was created by someone else (Insight something
* Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
|
| This issue came up recently in relation to backpatching a python fix,
| and the conclusion was that jdbc 7.1.X is "a hopeless cause" and I tend
| to agree. I had >6 unapplied jdbc patches at the time we released 7.1.
| They are all now in CVS.
> I'v
Patch applied. Thanks.
> Attached is a simple one line patch for the problem reported in the
> following email.
>
> thanks,
> --Barry
>
>
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Barry Lind [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > Sent: Tuesday, August 21, 2001 11:45 AM
> > To: Jason Orendorff
>
> * Barry Lind <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> |
> |
> | Now having said that, there isn't any reason that the jdbc code can't
> | be released more frequently than the server. But without a lot more
>
> Maybe there could be sub releases or something, e.g. jdbc version 7.1.2_004
> begin release num
* Barry Lind <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
|
|
| Now having said that, there isn't any reason that the jdbc code can't
| be released more frequently than the server. But without a lot more
Maybe there could be sub releases or something, e.g. jdbc version 7.1.2_004
begin release number 4 of the JDB
FYI -- jdbc questions should go to the pgsql-jdbc mail list.
To your question, yes BigDecimal it the appropriate java data type for a
postgres numeric data type.
thanks,
--Barry
Mihai Gheorghiu wrote:
> Would Java BigDecimal type be a good match for PG Numeric, or do I need to
> look further
FYI -- JDBC questions should go to the pgsql-jdbc mail list.
As for your problem, I think probably the easiest workaround is to
explicitly cast your constants. Assuming you are using
PreparedStatements, a statement of the following form should work:
select * from foo
where bar = ?::numeric
W
I personally am against the idea of having the JDBC driver on a
completely different schedule from the server. I beleive that many
people like the binary distributions of Postgres. And that the binary
distributions should include the jdbc driver. Since the binary
distributions are tied to ser
I am assuming that this would be a new function in the server.
Therefore this wouldn't be jdbc specific and would be available to all
client interfaces. I don't see what this really has to do with JDBC.
thanks,
--Barry
Ned Wolpert wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
>
22 matches
Mail list logo
