Thread: cursor access doesn't work anmore
I execute PQexec(simple_connection, copiedquery); with copiedquery being "declare cur cursor for select name , born from meskes " followed by another call to PQexec with the command "fetch in cur ". I get an OK status back, but no tuples. However, just using "select name , born from meskes;" in psql gives me a correct list with five rows. Two days ago when I tried this the last time it worked without a problem. That is to say, I'm using the current snapshot I got from cvs this morning. Should a problem with the development version be reported here, or on the bugs list? Michael -- Dr. Michael Meskes, Project-Manager | topsystem Systemhaus GmbH meskes@topsystem.de | Europark A2, Adenauerstr. 20 meskes@debian.org | 52146 Wuerselen Go SF49ers! Go Rhein Fire! | Tel: (+49) 2405/4670-44 Use Debian GNU/Linux! | Fax: (+49) 2405/4670-10
On Wed, 11 Feb 1998, Michael Meskes wrote:
> I execute PQexec(simple_connection, copiedquery); with copiedquery being
> "declare cur cursor for select name , born from meskes " followed by another
> call to PQexec with the command "fetch in cur ". I get an OK status back,
> but no tuples. However, just using "select name , born from meskes;" in psql
> gives me a correct list with five rows.
>
> Two days ago when I tried this the last time it worked without a problem.
> That is to say, I'm using the current snapshot I got from cvs this morning.
>
> Should a problem with the development version be reported here, or on the
> bugs list?
Here works...is anyone even using bugs?
> > I execute PQexec(simple_connection, copiedquery); with copiedquery being > "declare cur cursor for select name , born from meskes " followed by another > call to PQexec with the command "fetch in cur ". I get an OK status back, > but no tuples. However, just using "select name , born from meskes;" in psql > gives me a correct list with five rows. > > Two days ago when I tried this the last time it worked without a problem. > That is to say, I'm using the current snapshot I got from cvs this morning. > > Should a problem with the development version be reported here, or on the > bugs list? > Have you done initdb. We changed things recently. -- Bruce Momjian maillist@candle.pha.pa.us
Bruce Momjian wrote: > > Have you done initdb. We changed things recently. Shouldn't PG_VERSION be changed every time something changes in the database file formats? It is now set to 6.3, but should probably be 6.3.<something> As I understand it, this is the place where the backend can look and decide if it can access the files or not. /* m */
On Fri, 13 Feb 1998, Mattias Kregert wrote: > Shouldn't PG_VERSION be changed every time something changes in the > database file formats? > > It is now set to 6.3, but should probably be 6.3.<something> > > As I understand it, this is the place where the backend can look and > decide if it can access the files or not. I would have thought so, yes. However, not until 6.3 is released. Until then, the files can change often. Remember, were in beta. If we changed it before release, then we would get questions like "Why does PG_VERSION show 6.3.9 when I'm running 6.3?" I think the only time this should change is between public releases/subreleases. -- Peter T Mount petermount@earthling.net or pmount@maidast.demon.co.uk Main Homepage: http://www.demon.co.uk/finder Work Homepage: http://www.maidstone.gov.uk Work EMail: peter@maidstone.gov.uk