Thread: Re: [HACKERS] ODBC Driver int8 Patch
I am waiting for someone to comment on this. Anyone? [ Charset ISO-8859-1 unsupported, converting... ] > Hi Bruce, > > Did you accept this patch in the end or was it rejected? > > Regards, Dave. > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Bruce Momjian [mailto:pgman@candle.pha.pa.us] > > Sent: 16 January 2001 16:50 > > To: Dave Page > > Cc: 'pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org' > > Subject: Re: [HACKERS] ODBC Driver int8 Patch > > > > > > As I remember, the problem is that this makes us match the > > ODBC v2 spec, > > but then we would not match the v3 spec. Is that correct? > > > > > > [ Charset ISO-8859-1 unsupported, converting... ] > > > Hi, > > > > > > It was suggested that I post this patch here as no notice > > was taken of it > > > when posted to interfaces! > > > > > > This fixes problems with int8 columns which are reported by > > the driver as > > > SQL_BIGINT rather than SQL_CHAR as per the ODBC v2 spec. > > Specifically, I > > > have had problems with MS ADO - any queries that contain an > > int8 column in > > > the resultset will *always* return an empty recordset. > > > > > > Regards, > > > > > > Dave. > > > > > > *** pgtypes.c.orig Fri Dec 22 09:12:22 2000 > > > --- pgtypes.c Fri Dec 22 09:12:22 2000 > > > *************** > > > *** 217,223 **** > > > case PG_TYPE_XID: > > > case PG_TYPE_INT4: return SQL_INTEGER; > > > > > > ! case PG_TYPE_INT8: return SQL_BIGINT; > > > case PG_TYPE_NUMERIC: return SQL_NUMERIC; > > > > > > case PG_TYPE_FLOAT4: return SQL_REAL; > > > --- 217,223 ---- > > > case PG_TYPE_XID: > > > case PG_TYPE_INT4: return SQL_INTEGER; > > > > > > ! case PG_TYPE_INT8: return SQL_CHAR; > > > case PG_TYPE_NUMERIC: return SQL_NUMERIC; > > > > > > case PG_TYPE_FLOAT4: return SQL_REAL; > > > > > > > > > -- > > Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us > > pgman@candle.pha.pa.us | (610) 853-3000 > > + If your life is a hard drive, | 830 Blythe Avenue > > + Christ can be your backup. | Drexel Hill, > > Pennsylvania 19026 > > > -- Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us pgman@candle.pha.pa.us | (610) 853-3000 + If your life is a hard drive, | 830 Blythe Avenue + Christ can be your backup. | Drexel Hill, Pennsylvania 19026
Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us> writes:
> I am waiting for someone to comment on this. Anyone?
Seems like we need a policy decision: do we want to try to be ODBC v2 or
v3? I don't know what else we might have to change if we want to be
v3-compliant, so that seems like a risky way to proceed right before
a release ...
regards, tom lane
> I am waiting for someone to comment on this. Anyone?
Looks good, but...
We should surround the change with #ifdef ODBC_V2 or ODBC_V3 to mark
what should be changed when moving to the newer standard. No point in
having to remember this from first principles when we do move to V3...
- Thomas
On Tue, 23 Jan 2001, Tom Lane wrote: > Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us> writes: > > I am waiting for someone to comment on this. Anyone? > > Seems like we need a policy decision: do we want to try to be ODBC v2 or > v3? I don't know what else we might have to change if we want to be > v3-compliant, so that seems like a risky way to proceed right before > a release ... Are we breaking anything by losing the v3-compliancy at this point? The patch is small, so should be brain-dead to reverse at a later date *if* we aren't breaking anything by applying it now ...
Applied, with comment about changes need for V3. > On Tue, 23 Jan 2001, Tom Lane wrote: > > > Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us> writes: > > > I am waiting for someone to comment on this. Anyone? > > > > Seems like we need a policy decision: do we want to try to be ODBC v2 or > > v3? I don't know what else we might have to change if we want to be > > v3-compliant, so that seems like a risky way to proceed right before > > a release ... > > Are we breaking anything by losing the v3-compliancy at this point? The > patch is small, so should be brain-dead to reverse at a later date *if* we > aren't breaking anything by applying it now ... > > > -- Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us pgman@candle.pha.pa.us | (610) 853-3000 + If your life is a hard drive, | 830 Blythe Avenue + Christ can be your backup. | Drexel Hill, Pennsylvania 19026
I would like too. Where can I get the compiled version? Joseph ----- Original Message ----- From: "Bruce Momjian" <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us> To: "The Hermit Hacker" <scrappy@hub.org> Cc: "Tom Lane" <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>; "Dave Page" <dpage@vale-housing.co.uk>; <pgsql-odbc@postgresql.org>; "PostgreSQL-patches" <pgsql-patches@postgresql.org> Sent: Tuesday, January 23, 2001 3:24 PM Subject: [ODBC] Re: [PATCHES] Re: [HACKERS] ODBC Driver int8 Patch > > Applied, with comment about changes need for V3. > > > On Tue, 23 Jan 2001, Tom Lane wrote: > > > > > Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us> writes: > > > > I am waiting for someone to comment on this. Anyone? > > > > > > Seems like we need a policy decision: do we want to try to be ODBC v2 or > > > v3? I don't know what else we might have to change if we want to be > > > v3-compliant, so that seems like a risky way to proceed right before > > > a release ... > > > > Are we breaking anything by losing the v3-compliancy at this point? The > > patch is small, so should be brain-dead to reverse at a later date *if* we > > aren't breaking anything by applying it now ... > > > > > > > > > -- > Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us > pgman@candle.pha.pa.us | (610) 853-3000 > + If your life is a hard drive, | 830 Blythe Avenue > + Christ can be your backup. | Drexel Hill, Pennsylvania 19026 > >