Обсуждение: Why JDBC 1?
Perhaps this is a silly question, but why do we have separate JDBC 1 and 2 drivers? Isn't the JDBC 2 driver also an implementation of JDBC 1? Regards, René Pijlman <rene@lab.applinet.nl>
Yes, it is, but many of the libraries, and methods which are used in version 2 of the driver aren't available in jdk1 so it won't compile or run. Dave On Tue, 2001-09-04 at 12:50, Rene Pijlman wrote: > Perhaps this is a silly question, but why do we have separate > JDBC 1 and 2 drivers? > > Isn't the JDBC 2 driver also an implementation of JDBC 1? > > Regards, > René Pijlman <rene@lab.applinet.nl> > > ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- > TIP 4: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster > >
One reason is that jdbc2 goes along with Java2. Thus in the jdbc2 tree we are allowed to use new methods introduced in jdk1.2. Whereas in the jdbc1 tree we are limited to methods available in jdk1.1. thanks, --Barry Rene Pijlman wrote: > Perhaps this is a silly question, but why do we have separate > JDBC 1 and 2 drivers? > > Isn't the JDBC 2 driver also an implementation of JDBC 1? > > Regards, > René Pijlman <rene@lab.applinet.nl> > > ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- > TIP 4: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster > >
On 04 Sep 2001 13:22:33 -0400, Dave Cramer wrote: >> Isn't the JDBC 2 driver also an implementation of JDBC 1? >Yes, it is, but many of the libraries, and methods which are used in >version 2 of the driver aren't available in jdk1 so it won't compile or >run. Ah, I see. And I assume we support JDBC 1 for applets that need to run in popular browsers with a JVM 1. Has it been discussed before when and how we can stop maintaining two versions? Are people really still using JDBC 1? Regards, René Pijlman <rene@lab.applinet.nl>
On Fri, 2001-09-07 at 00:11, Rene Pijlman wrote: > On 04 Sep 2001 13:22:33 -0400, Dave Cramer wrote: > >> Isn't the JDBC 2 driver also an implementation of JDBC 1? > >Yes, it is, but many of the libraries, and methods which are used in > >version 2 of the driver aren't available in jdk1 so it won't compile or > >run. > > Ah, I see. And I assume we support JDBC 1 for applets that need > to run in popular browsers with a JVM 1. > > Has it been discussed before when and how we can stop > maintaining two versions? > > Are people really still using JDBC 1? I try and run everything on the server where possible so JDBC 2 here Tony Grant -- RedHat Linux on Sony Vaio C1XD/S http://www.animaproductions.com/linux2.html Macromedia UltraDev with PostgreSQL http://www.animaproductions.com/ultra.html