java.sql2 annotation usage
lukas.eder at gmail.com
Mon Oct 23 18:47:17 UTC 2017
2017-10-18 20:21 GMT+02:00 Douglas Surber <douglas.surber at oracle.com>:
> 1) open question. Proposals welcome.
I have a long flight coming up soon - will think about this.
> 2) the elementSqlTypeName can be any SQL type, not just a user defined
> type, so “NUMBER” would be fine.
> 3,4.5) Work in Progress. For the most part the annotations are just
> placeholders, reminders that we need something to address the particular
> need. What would be enormously helpful is for you (or anyone) to provide
> actual Java source files with JavaDoc for these annotation ideas.
Same as 1)
8) I like this idea a lot. I’ll take a cut at it and see how much weight it
> adds. In some ways I like it better than the iterative approach. What would
> you think of eliminating the iterative model and replacing it with the list
I'm undecided. An iterative model would allow for avoiding the need to
buffer a large set of batched parameters in the client. This is a mistake
that the jOOQ API made early on, following the list model. Which is, of
course, much more convenient for smaller batches.
Perhaps, we can have both? But if a decision has to be made for one, I
suspect the iterative model would be better.
More information about the jdbc-spec-discuss