Re: IN clauses via setObject(Collection) [Was: Re: Prepared Statements]

From: Oliver Jowett <oliver(at)opencloud(dot)com>
To: Dmitry Tkach <dmitry(at)openratings(dot)com>
Cc: Fernando Nasser <fnasser(at)redhat(dot)com>, Kim Ho <kho(at)redhat(dot)com>, Barry Lind <blind(at)xythos(dot)com>, pgsql-jdbc-list <pgsql-jdbc(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Dave Cramer <Dave(at)micro-automation(dot)net>
Subject: Re: IN clauses via setObject(Collection) [Was: Re: Prepared Statements]
Date: 2003-07-22 03:24:06
Message-ID: 20030722032406.GH10023@opencloud.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-jdbc

On Mon, Jul 21, 2003 at 12:33:40PM -0400, Dmitry Tkach wrote:
> >
> >
> >Also.. what would we do with this object?
> >
> >public class AnnoyingObject implements java.util.Collection,
> >java.sql.Array {
> > // ...
> >}
> >
> >then setObject(n, new AnnoyingObject(), Types.ARRAY);
> >
> >Is that an Array, or an IN clause of Arrays? :)
> >
> >(Array is the obvious candidate for also being a Collection, but
> >potentially
> >you could do it with other types too)
> >
> >
> >
> java.sql.Array is an ARRAY.
> I don't think there is any ambiguity here, as it is the only reason I
> can imagine for somebody to implement a sql.Array is to pass an ARRAY
> into a PreparedStatement.
>
>
> If they wanted a set of arrays, they would have to pass in a Collection,
> containing java.sql.Arrays as elements...

Reread the class declaration, AnnoyingObject is both an Array and a
Collection.

-O

In response to

Browse pgsql-jdbc by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Oliver Jowett 2003-07-22 03:34:47 Re: IN clauses via setObject(Collection) [Was: Re: Prepared Statements]
Previous Message Oliver Jowett 2003-07-22 01:16:24 Re: Detecting 'socket errors' - closing the Connection object