[pjmlp]

I beg to differ, those drivers exist since Java was owned by Sun.

Also Oracle was the first RDMS to support stored procedures in Java.

So source isn't available yet you are able to judge the code quality, interesting.

No, disassembling bytecode isn't a reflection of the quality of the original source code.

[augusto-moura]

Sure it works, and is well tested and mature, and so are most of the jdbc drivers, never had any problem with any jdbc driver, aside of digging to code to understand some not documented behaviours. I don't see why put the Java driver as a benefit point of Oracle, most of the developers problems and issues don't occur at the JDBC level. It might be true for .NET but I'm really supicious if the Oracle support is that better over others

I didn't say code quality, I said usage of obscure and internal hacks from the JVM and JDK

[pjmlp]

Well, to know which obscure and internal hacks are those one has to read the source code.

Also Oracle drivers also run in other JVMs, so which JVM are they abusing then?

As for why speaking about the drivers, I have had my share of driver issues during the last couple of decades, when going enterprise scale.

[thda]

> Also Oracle was the first RDMS to support stored procedures in Java.

Who in their right mind would do that ? It's a nightmare on so many levels....

[pjmlp]

All big boys RDMS support stored procedures in Java, and some of them in .NET as well on their Windows deployments.

[jacques_chester]

Because the alternative is PL/SQL, which is Ada minus 90% of the things that make Ada reliable and powerful.

[pjmlp]

The only stored procedure language that I consider competitive to PL/SQL is Transact-SQL.