| From: | Kris Jurka <books(at)ejurka(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Dave Cramer <pg(at)fastcrypt(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Oliver Jowett <oliver(at)opencloud(dot)com>, "pgsql-jdbc(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-jdbc(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: getXXX methods |
| Date: | 2004-07-08 06:50:26 |
| Message-ID: | Pine.BSO.4.56.0407080146340.23659@leary.csoft.net |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-jdbc |
On Wed, 7 Jul 2004, Dave Cramer wrote:
> Ok, it appears (at least from my understanding) that Kris is correct
> here.
>
> I had a look at the sql2003 proposed spec (ISO/IEC 9075-2:2003(E)), and
> it states:
Well the SQL spec and the JDBC spec are different things. I was basing
part of my argument on the SQL spec's logic and extending that to fill in
the holes in the JDBC spec, but I don't consider this definitive. I still
feel this is the right thing to do, but I don't want to close off the
discussion if people feel otherwise.
Kris Jurka
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Kris Jurka | 2004-07-08 07:06:30 | Re: bpchat cannot exceed 10485760 |
| Previous Message | Kris Jurka | 2004-07-08 06:46:25 | Re: ResultSerMetaData.getColumnDisplaySize() with timestamp |