Generic iSeries JDBC Interface

["Joe Pluta" <joepluta@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

> From: Don McIntyre
>
> Amen, Joe, I agree, but your preaching to the Choir.   I have
> been trying to
> get them (here) to standardize to the iSeries but am not in control here.
(...)
> Our User
> departments are allowed (not supposed to but will anyway) to run amuck and
> sometimes purchase systems without IT approval, but we're (IT) still
> responsible to maintain and interface into our enterprise systems.

My deepest sympathies.  What a horribly untenable position to be in.


> > Hmmm.  That's a real thought.  A Type 4 JDBC driver whose sole
> > purpose is to
> > talk to a Windows ODBC client.  Verrrrrrrrrrrry interesting...
>
> Joe, send me an order form, I want to get my order in for your new Type 4
> JDBC driver that will access any Windows ODBC client.
> This is currently beyond my technical ability at this time.  I'm
> an old 20+
> year RPG'er that began learning all this fun new technology about 2+ years
> ago. (and by the way, I agree with you on deployment complexity for
> WebSphere :)

Would you be willing to take one that didn't have all the JDBC bells and
whistles?  That is, one that simply did the basic SELECT, UPDATE, INSERT and
DELETE, without pooled connections, prepared statements and scrollable
cursors?  Because in that case I have to believe that basic JDBC support is
doable without a whole lot of effort.

Seriously, it would be a reasonable addition to JTOpen, if nothing else.  It
would be a straight JDBC proxy, with the JDBC driver on the iSeries passing
the requests directly to a JDBC proxy on the Windows box.  The JDBC-W proxy
would then be able to take advantage of all the ODBC drivers currently out
there using the simple Type 1 JDBC/ODBC bridge classes.

It wouldn't be fast, but it would be really flexible.

It could even be an Eclipse plug-in <grin>.

Joe