Message-ID: <39332920.4C9BC95B@selectacast.net>
Date: Mon, 29 May 2000 22:36:16 -0400
From: Joseph Shraibman <jks@selectacast.net>
Organization: Xtenit
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Gunnar R|nning <gunnar@candleweb.no>
CC: Janossy Gergely <gjano@freemail.hu>, pgsql-interfaces@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: jdbc driver: Why it isn't jdbcCompliant?
References: <00052701341103.02227@azul> <x6snv3ot1g.fsf@thor.candleweb.no>
	<3932BC0A.482A765B@selectacast.net>
	<x61z2lx7nh.fsf@thor.candleweb.no>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

I wasn't making a point.  I was just including the comment from the
source code to tell why jdbcCompliant() returns false, namely that
postgresql isn't sql 92 compliant.

Gunnar R|nning wrote:
> 
> Joseph Shraibman <jks@selectacast.net> writes:
> 
> Yes - your point being ? I think that you will find that most JDBC drivers
> out there do not implement the spec. to the letter. But using good OO
> design principles and adapters you can easily use a subset of the spec(plus
> your favorite non SQL 92 database extensions) together with appropriate
> adaptors to keep things fairly easy to port between databases. The four
> databases that I know best Sybase ASE, PosgreSQL, Progress V9.1 and MySQL
> do not fully implement the JDBC spec. But then again I think SQL 92 is the
> same story...
> 
> Regards,
> 
>         Gunnar
> 
> > >From the Driver source code:
> 
> >   public boolean jdbcCompliant()
> >   {
> >     return false;
> >   }