Re: AbstractJdbc2Array - another patch

[Marek Lewczuk <newsy(at)lewczuk(dot)com>]

Kris Jurka pisze:
> Doh!  OK, now it mostly works, but there's still an issue with setting 
> the basetype on a subarray to the base element type instead of an array 
> type, as attached.  rs.getObject() (and metadata) are confused about 
> what the correct type is.
I see the problem. I assume that we need to add support for array types, 
which means that org.postgresql.core.Oid must have oid for every base 
type array, e.g. _INT2 = 1005. It will be also required to add 
appropriate data within org.postgresql.jdbc2.TypeInfoCache#types. Should 
I do it ?

Regards,
Marek Lewczuk