Re: [JDBC] BUG #7766: Running a DML statement that affects more than 4 billion rows results in an exception - Mailing list pgsql-bugs

From Péter Kovács
Subject Re: [JDBC] BUG #7766: Running a DML statement that affects more than 4 billion rows results in an exception
Date
Msg-id CAO01x1Fmx=4sdY_v1FxdF8vTSvbkcGU=6NQAe-9Ve9xK6V-QjQ@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: [JDBC] BUG #7766: Running a DML statement that affects more than 4 billion rows results in an exception  (Dave Cramer <pg@fastcrypt.com>)
Responses Re: [JDBC] BUG #7766: Running a DML statement that affects more than 4 billion rows results in an exception
List pgsql-bugs

And what about http://docs.oracle.com/javase/6/docs/api/java/sql/Statement.html#getUpdateCount() ?

P.

On Jan 11, 2013 2:20 PM, "Dave Cramer" <pg@fastcrypt.com> wrote:
Ok, this is much more difficult than I thought.

Turns out that there are at least two interfaces that expect an int not a long.

BatchUpdateException
executeBatch

I'm thinking the only option here is to report INT_MAX as opposed to failing.

Thoughts ?

Dave


Dave Cramer

dave.cramer(at)credativ(dot)ca
http://www.credativ.ca


On Fri, Dec 21, 2012 at 3:17 PM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
Dave Cramer <pg@fastcrypt.com> writes:
> So an unsigned long won't fit inside a java long either, but hopefully it
> will never be necessary. That would be a huge number of changes.

I think we'll all be safely dead by the time anybody manages to process
2^63 rows in one PG command ;-).  If you can widen the value from int to
long on the Java side, that should be sufficient.

                        regards, tom lane

pgsql-bugs by date:

Previous
From: David Boutin
Date:
Subject: Re: BUG #7793: tsearch_data thesaurus size limit
Next
From: Dave Cramer
Date:
Subject: Re: [JDBC] BUG #7766: Running a DML statement that affects more than 4 billion rows results in an exception