This is probably the only possible implementation unless there are fb
features I don't know about.

Are you proposing an additional ResultSet wrapper implementation with this
feature or modifying the existing one? I'd be more comfortable with a
wrapper at this point, but will listen to arguments. I'd like to keep the
most basic result set implementation as small and fast as possible. Maybe
its an unreasonable bias, but I don't really see the need for the fancy
result sets/row set requirements. I think using an app server is a better
idea.

Now that I've clearly stated my unreasonable point of view;-), I'd be fine
with a wrapper implementation of any of the extended result set/rowset
functionality and don't think it would interfere with anything. I want to
see a design or implementation if you want to have just one result set
implementation.

thanks

david jencks

On 2002.05.22 11:48:01 -0400 Marczisovszky Daniel wrote:
>
> >1. JDBC conformance is top priority issue.
>
> Dear Roman,
>
> Just an idea, I'd like to hear opinions about it. I think the biggest
> issue with JDBC2 conformance is updatable result sets. I don't know
> too much about this part of the IB API, but the MySQL driver solves
> this by dynamically generated simple SQL queries. Is there any reason
> why it would not fit in the current implementation?
>
> Best wishes,
> Daniel
>
>
>
> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> Firebird-Java-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
>
>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>
>
>
>