> Seriosuly? Oracle Objects = Exotic Feature? I guess we live/work in different worlds.
Obviously since I am successful without them. Apparently you need them.
> I don't think the pool is the issue. I think the struct is the issue.
It would seem obvious that "oracle.sql.STRUCT" is in fact a Oracle specific feature which is not going to be exposed in the JDBC API. From that my other comments are exactly as I stated.
Tell your Java dev team that they need to use java.sql.Struct, not oracle.sql.STRUCT. This is part of standard JDBC and does not require access to the vendor connection. Or set the type map and use your favorite Java class to represent the Struct objects.
PS oracle.sql.STRUCT is an implementation of java.sql.Struct but that is an irrelevant detail so far as your Java dev team is concerned. They can write everything they need to with just java.sql.Struct.
Thank you. That's exactly the kind of info I was looking for. I talked to some folks at JavaOne and got a better explanation of the type maps and it seems like, in general, the struct is a better approach. Didn't know about the relation between oracle.sql.STRUCT and java.sql.Struct. That will be helpful when talking with the team.