On Wed, Feb 3, 2010 at 4:16 PM, Erik Hatcher <erik.hatc...@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Feb 3, 2010, at 5:36 AM, Noble Paul നോബിള് नोब्ळ् wrote: >> >> On Wed, Feb 3, 2010 at 3:31 PM, Erik Hatcher <erik.hatc...@gmail.com> >> wrote: >>> >>> One thing I find awkward about convertType is that it is JdbcDataSource >>> specific, rather than field-specific. Isn't the current implementation >>> far >>> too broad? >> >> it is feature of JdbcdataSource and no other dataSource offers it. we >> offer it because JDBC drivers have mechanism to do type conversion >> >> What do you mean by it is too broad? > > I mean the convertType flag is not field-specific (or at least field > overridable). Conversions occur on a per-field basis, but the setting is > for the entire data source and thus all fields. Yes. it is true. First of all this is not very widely used, so fine tuning did not make sense > > Erik > >
-- ----------------------------------------------------- Noble Paul | Systems Architect| AOL | http://aol.com
