Subject RE: [IB-Java] Re: JDBC Development
Author Ken Richard
Not everyone wants a type-4 driver. I would be happy with a type-2 driver
because it will live on the same server as interbase in my application. I
think that we should design a driver architecture with a JDBC Layer and an
Firebird Layer. The firebird layer would be implemented as an interface to
support multiple implementations (one type-2 through part of Jim's ODBC
Driver and another 3050 protocol from scratch).

The firebird layer would be designed according to interbase semantics to
make it easier to implement. Any functions required of the jdbc driver that
are not directly supported by GDS/Protocol would be implemented in the JDBC
Layer. For example, the metadata stuff would be implemented by executing
queries on the server. This way the metadata stuff does not need to be
implemented twice.

As an added advantage, the gds implementation through Jim's stuff will be
much easier to implement than the level 4 driver. We can get the JDBC stuff
and the GDS stuff working while people who care can start working on the
protocol layer.

-----Original Message-----
From: news@... [mailto:news@...]On Behalf Of Mark
Sent: Friday, April 27, 2001 9:51 AM
Subject: Re: [IB-Java] Re: JDBC Development

Mark O'Donohue wrote (re type2 or jni driver for jdbc ):

> It
> ain't that bad, and it does have the advantage of the C side pushing
> into the existing C sql calling interface (lots of the current intersever
> also be stripped to go into that).

I forgot to the most useful source of info for the native side of a type
2 driver which would be Jim's current ODBC driver.

But to emphasise again, it's a type 4 driver everyone wants.