> For numeric types (with no explicit scale and precision) JDBC returns 0 for
> both precision and scale (ResultSetMetaData.getPrecision and getScale
> methods). This is breaking my app and IMO does not reflect true state of
> things since Postgres docs state: "NUMERIC without any precision or scale
> creates a column in which numeric values of any precision and scale can be
> stored, up to the implementation limit on precision".
>
> Shouldn't PG JDBC driver return maximum possible values for precision and
> scale in such cases?
>
There are a couple of issues here:
1) While PG supports larger numeric values, the maximum precision you can
constrain it to is 1000.
jurka=# create temp table tt (a numeric (1001, 1));
ERROR: NUMERIC precision 1001 must be between 1 and 1000
So do you return 1000 as the maximum precision because that's the maximum
that they can pass into create table even if they might actually receive a
value back that has a higher precision? Or do you return something larger
(the internal pg limit which I don't know offhand) even though they can't
create a table column with that limit?
2) Once you've set the maximum precision, how do you set the maximum
scale as the scale is a dependent on the precision. Is it (1000,500) ?
(1000, 0)? (1000, 1000)?
What we do now certainly isn't all that great, but I haven't heard a
concrete suggestion on what's better.
Kris Jurka
--
Sent via pgsql-jdbc mailing list (pgsql-jdbc@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-jdbc
No comments:
Post a Comment