I've always wanted to be able to do something like rs.getRowCount() instead, but having implemented a JDBC driver I realize how dangerous such as function is. The programmer will assume that it is a simple number that the driver can return, but in many case, in order to get that number, the driver has to get all of the rows first. At least, that is what the issue was with our database. So making the programmer do extra work might force him/her to think whether such a thing is a good idea (especially if the row count is possibly in the thousands or higher!)