Re: Cursor based statements ADDENDUM

Well, they need to be in before 7.4 because it is broken. I'll be
patching the code in a few minutes.

You should send patches to the list so I don't end up wasting time
fixing stuff you've already fixed.

--dc--
On Mon, 2003-10-27 at 21:18, Oliver Jowett wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 27, 2003 at 06:15:55PM -0500, Dave Cramer wrote:
> > It appears that this is a 7.4 issues, previous versions used to destroy
> > a cursor if it existed, 7.4 does not do this.
>
> I sent some patches to Barry last week which should fix this (among other
> things they deal with fetchsize better, and regenerate the cursor name on
> each query execution) -- although I don't have a 7.4 server to test against.
> He was going to hold them until post-7.4 before applying, though, since they
> weren't trivial changes.
>
> > Dave
> >
> > On Mon, 2003-10-27 at 16:52, Dave Cramer wrote:
> > > Just going through the code and the CursorFetchTest fails on the 3rd
> > > iteration
> > >
> > > This is because the code can't deal with changing the fetch size on an
> > > already declared fetch size.
> > >
> > > the question is do we want that ability. the spec of course is
> > > ambiguous.
>
> What's ambiguous exactly? At most the fetchsize is a hint, we should still
> behave correctly regardless of what value that hint takes.
>
> -O
>
--
Dave Cramer <Dave@micro-automation.net>