Re: Bug in SQLRowCount ?

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
От Johann Letzel
Тема Re: Bug in SQLRowCount ?
Дата
Msg-id 50FE2B7F.7040202@t-online.de
обсуждение исходный текст
Ответ на Re: Bug in SQLRowCount ?  (Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnakangas@vmware.com>)
Ответы Re: Bug in SQLRowCount ?  (Jaydip <jaydeep.thakkar92@gmail.com>)
Список pgsql-odbc
Hi !

A big thanks for the tips :)

I solved it now by the use of SQL_ATTR_PARAMS_PROCESSED_PTR and
SQL_ATTR_PARAM_STATUS_PTR.

By the way: MSSQL also returns SQL_PARC_BATCH ;)

Regards

Johann

Am 17.01.2013 18:03, schrieb Heikki Linnakangas:
> On 17.01.2013 16:05, Johann Letzel wrote:
>> But according to the ODBC API SQLRowCount should retrieve the number
>> of affected rows by the statement.
>>
>> Why does PostgreSQL gives a 1 and MSSQL the number of inserted/updated
>> rows ?
>
> According to this:
> http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/windows/desktop/ms711818%28v=vs.85%29.aspx,
> both behaviors are permitted. When the driver returns SQL_PARC_BATCH,
> when you call SQLGetInfo(conn, SQL_PARAM_ARRAY_ROW_COUNTS, ... ), the
> driver returns a separate row count for each parameter (PostgreSQL).
> When it returns SQL_PARC_NO_BATCH, it returns a single row count that's
> the sum of all parameters (MSSQL). In a portable application, you need
> to call SQLGetInfo, and deal with both behaviors.
>
> - Heikki
>


В списке pgsql-odbc по дате отправления:

Предыдущее
От: Sandeep Thakkar
Дата:
Сообщение: Error connecting psqlODBC to PostgreSQL
Следующее
От: "j.letzel@t-online.de"
Дата:
Сообщение: SQL_CONCUR_LOCK not supported ?