It doesn't even get to postgres at that point. So it must be something
else. Is the query correct?
Dave
On Tue, 2002-10-29 at 11:23, ygloriau@siliage.fr wrote:
> Hi,
> I'm using this driver: pgjdbc2.jar
> And i'm sure that the problem is from the number of parameter. I tryed to
> insert other parameters before before the 51th, and it didn't worked.
> I also had a look at the source code. I've seen that it wasn't limited.
> So, if it's not the driver, may it be postgres ?
> Yann
>
>
> Surlignage Dave Cramer <Dave@micro-automation.net>:
>
> > Yann
> >
> > Which version of the driver are you using.
> >
> > Looking at the latest code, the statement is parsed and the number of
> > parameters are set based on the number of ? marks in the statement. Are
> > you sure it is the number of parameters or actually the 51 st parameter
> > that is causing the problem.
> >
> > Dave
> > On Tue, 2002-10-29 at 10:35, ygloriau@siliage.fr wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > > Hi all,
> > > I'm dealing with the hugest query i've ever seen : 93 parameters !
> > >
> > > The problem is that i got an exception when i try to add the 51th
> > parameter.
> > > No way to have mor ethan 50 parameters.
> > > Is there a solution to fix up this problem ?
> > > (I won't rewrite the query !)
> > >
> > > thanks
> > >
> > > Yann
> > >
> > > ---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
> > > TIP 4: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
> ---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
> TIP 6: Have you searched our list archives?
>
> http://archives.postgresql.org
>
>
