Thread: New driver options in 7.01.0007

Hi,

what about the option:

DRIVER_CURSOR_IMPLEMENT

in psqlodbc.dll?  (7.01.0007)

Does that work already if I set it true?
I tried it. Didn't make any difference.
But I don't know whether my application
uses driver cursors.

And what is the meaning of the option 'common'?
(except of disabling other options)

So far the driver seems to be stable.

regards


Johann Zuschlag
zuschlag2@online.de

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Johann Zuschlag
>
> Hi,
>
> what about the option:
>
> DRIVER_CURSOR_IMPLEMENT
>
> in psqlodbc.dll?  (7.01.0007)
>
> Does that work already if I set it true?

Maybe yes at least for static cursors
and it may be a true option in the future.
However I'm not sure if I should do it.
I'm disappointed with some 7.2 changes
which lost the premises of my plan and
it's possible for me to lose my all premises
in the future.

> I tried it. Didn't make any difference.
> But I don't know whether my application
> uses driver cursors.

DRIVER_CURSOR_IMPLEMENT enables
the use of SQLSetPos with SQL_UPDATE,
SQL_DELETE and SQL_ADD options for
static cursors. It's hard to tell where it is used
in your tools.

>
> And what is the meaning of the option 'common'?
> (except of disabling other options)

Hmm I'm not good at English. I'm happy to
change it if you give an appropriate option name.

Most driver options could be set per each DSN now.
'Common' is the default setting of them.
If you add a new DSN you would see the content
of the default setting at first.

regards,
Hiroshi Inoue

On Sat, 22 Sep 2001 09:24:14 +0900, Hiroshi Inoue wrote:

>Maybe yes at least for static cursors
>and it may be a true option in the future.
>However I'm not sure if I should do it.
>I'm disappointed with some 7.2 changes
>which lost the premises of my plan and
>it's possible for me to lose my all premises
>in the future.

Since the PostgreSQL website isn't updated anymore,
I didn't follow the discussion. Which changes do you mean?
Did you lose all your new work? Or what do you mean
with all premises? The whole driver?

Personally I think that PostgreSQL will only be
of interest for many users if you can use it
from Windows. For that purpose you need
a working ODBC-driver. And it must support
(at least) all important features of the ODBC
specification. That's why I think that the
psqlodbc.dll is one of the most important
projects. Otherwise I would be forced to use
a commercial database.

>DRIVER_CURSOR_IMPLEMENT enables
>the use of SQLSetPos with SQL_UPDATE,
>SQL_DELETE and SQL_ADD options for
>static cursors. It's hard to tell where it is used
>in your tools.

I guess so.

>Hmm I'm not good at English. I'm happy to
>change it if you give an appropriate option name.

No, no your english is ok.
(saying this, I'm not a native english speaking person)

>Most driver options could be set per each DSN now.
>'Common' is the default setting of them.
>If you add a new DSN you would see the content
>of the default setting at first.

I thought it must be something like this.
I just tested it. So 'Common' shows you the
default setting and you can change that now.
Good feature!
What puzzles me a bit is that I would expect
a new window where I could change the
default behaviour.
Hmm, why don't we call it 'show/change default'?
Or something similiar.
Even though a new window would clarify things.

regards,


Johann Zuschlag
zuschlag2@online.de

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Johann Zuschlag [mailto:zuschlag2@online.de]
> Sent: 23 September 2001 15:14
> To: Hiroshi Inoue
> Cc: pgsql-odbc@postgresql.org
> Subject: Re: [ODBC] New driver options in 7.01.0007
>
>
> On Sat, 22 Sep 2001 09:24:14 +0900, Hiroshi Inoue wrote:
>
> >Maybe yes at least for static cursors
> >and it may be a true option in the future.
> >However I'm not sure if I should do it.
> >I'm disappointed with some 7.2 changes
> >which lost the premises of my plan and
> >it's possible for me to lose my all premises
> >in the future.
>
> Since the PostgreSQL website isn't updated anymore,

???

> I didn't follow the discussion. Which changes do you mean?
> Did you lose all your new work? Or what do you mean
> with all premises? The whole driver?
>
> Personally I think that PostgreSQL will only be
> of interest for many users if you can use it
> from Windows. For that purpose you need
> a working ODBC-driver. And it must support
> (at least) all important features of the ODBC
> specification. That's why I think that the
> psqlodbc.dll is one of the most important
> projects. Otherwise I would be forced to use
> a commercial database.

The new version of the driver should be available precompiled soon
(hopefully tomorrow morning) - the delay has been caused because there has
been work done improving the server configuration. I think Hiroshi means
that his development plans for the driver have had to change because of the
direction the server is going - certainly psqlodbc.dll isn't just going to
vanish!

Regards, Dave.

> The new version of the driver should be available precompiled soon
> (hopefully tomorrow morning) - the delay has been caused because there has
> been work done improving the server configuration. I think Hiroshi means
> that his development plans for the driver have had to change because of the
> direction the server is going - certainly psqlodbc.dll isn't just going to
> vanish!

If people have ODBC TODO items, I would be glad to add it to the main
TODO list.

--
  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

Right now, we're currently awaiting delivery and installation of a new
18gig drive to go into that server, which is what is holding up getting
the last few things off the old server, ftp.postgresql.org being one of
them :(

It was ordered last week, but we required a special SCSI cable to be made,
which we're hoping to get in on Monday ...

On Sun, 23 Sep 2001, Dave Page wrote:

>
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Johann Zuschlag [mailto:zuschlag2@online.de]
> > Sent: 23 September 2001 15:14
> > To: Hiroshi Inoue
> > Cc: pgsql-odbc@postgresql.org
> > Subject: Re: [ODBC] New driver options in 7.01.0007
> >
> >
> > On Sat, 22 Sep 2001 09:24:14 +0900, Hiroshi Inoue wrote:
> >
> > >Maybe yes at least for static cursors
> > >and it may be a true option in the future.
> > >However I'm not sure if I should do it.
> > >I'm disappointed with some 7.2 changes
> > >which lost the premises of my plan and
> > >it's possible for me to lose my all premises
> > >in the future.
> >
> > Since the PostgreSQL website isn't updated anymore,
>
> ???
>
> > I didn't follow the discussion. Which changes do you mean?
> > Did you lose all your new work? Or what do you mean
> > with all premises? The whole driver?
> >
> > Personally I think that PostgreSQL will only be
> > of interest for many users if you can use it
> > from Windows. For that purpose you need
> > a working ODBC-driver. And it must support
> > (at least) all important features of the ODBC
> > specification. That's why I think that the
> > psqlodbc.dll is one of the most important
> > projects. Otherwise I would be forced to use
> > a commercial database.
>
> The new version of the driver should be available precompiled soon
> (hopefully tomorrow morning) - the delay has been caused because there has
> been work done improving the server configuration. I think Hiroshi means
> that his development plans for the driver have had to change because of the
> direction the server is going - certainly psqlodbc.dll isn't just going to
> vanish!
>
> Regards, Dave.
>
> ---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
> TIP 5: Have you checked our extensive FAQ?
>
> http://www.postgresql.org/users-lounge/docs/faq.html
>

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Johann Zuschlag [mailto:zuschlag2@online.de]
> Sent: 23 September 2001 16:29
> To: Dave Page
> Subject: Re: [ODBC] New driver options in 7.01.0007
>
>
> Hi Dave,
>
> On Sun, 23 Sep 2001 15:39:55 +0100, Dave Page wrote:
>
> >> Since the PostgreSQL website isn't updated anymore,
> >
> >???
> Well, since I can't subscribe all mailing list, I just follow
> them on the web. The last entries are from sept 13th.

You'll need to take that up with the listmasters.

> >The new version of the driver should be available precompiled soon
> >(hopefully tomorrow morning) - the delay has been caused
> because there
> >has

This probably won't be the case now (the tomorrow morning bit - it'll
probably be longer), however if anyone really needs it, install the latest
pgAdmin II from http://pgadmin.postgresql.org and you'll get psqlodbc
07.01.0007.

> In fact I use CVS, since I have to do some changes in the
> driver. (My app uses the keywords limit, offset and position)
> But I can't reach CVS anymore.
> Even the web interface doesn't work anymore. Hiroshi told me to try:
>
> :pserver:anoncvs@anoncvs.postgresql.org:/projects/cvsroot
>
> Now I can log in. But the module path is not valid anymore:
>
> pgsql/src/interfaces/odbc
>
> Tried different things, but didn't work. I'm not a CVS
> specialist. Maybe you can supply the missing information.

I'm afraid I can't. I rarely use the cvs myself. Again though, the guys at
hub.org have been upgrading/re-arranging the servers - perhaps if Marc's
still reading this thread he can supply the correct cvsroot.

> >been work done improving the server configuration. I think Hiroshi
> >means that his development plans for the driver have had to change
> >because of the direction the server is going - certainly
> psqlodbc.dll
> >isn't just going to vanish!
>
> Well, maybe my words weren't choosed properly. But it seemed
> to me that he was quite disappointed. It's only half a year
> that the driver got important changes in parameter handling,
> so that I could start to use PostgreSQL from Windows.
> (PostgreSQL runs on Linux) That's why I try to support
> Hiroshi's development.

Yes, Hiroshi's work is certainly appreciated here as well - the driver went
through a bit of a bad spell after Byron had to quit working on it, but
Hiroshi has certainly filled the gap.

> By the way, pgAdmin II is a really good work. Only thing:
> It doesn't seem to use cursors. So, if I open a large table
> with 10.000+ rows it takes quite a long time. A part of that,
> it is near perfect. Never saw such a good tool.

Thanks, glad you like it. To be honest, I'm not sure how to implement
cursors in the datagrid... I'll add it to the todo list for future
consideration though.

Regards, Dave.

On Sun, 23 Sep 2001, Dave Page wrote:

>
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Johann Zuschlag [mailto:zuschlag2@online.de]
> > Sent: 23 September 2001 16:29
> > To: Dave Page
> > Subject: Re: [ODBC] New driver options in 7.01.0007
> >
> >
> > Hi Dave,
> >
> > On Sun, 23 Sep 2001 15:39:55 +0100, Dave Page wrote:
> >
> > >> Since the PostgreSQL website isn't updated anymore,
> > >
> > >???
> > Well, since I can't subscribe all mailing list, I just follow
> > them on the web. The last entries are from sept 13th.
>
> You'll need to take that up with the listmasters.

But to subscribe, check out the new links to the subscription form in
the users lounge and the new developer's site.

[snip]

> > :pserver:anoncvs@anoncvs.postgresql.org:/projects/cvsroot

Shouldn't that be:

:pserver:anoncvs@anoncvs.postgresql.org:/cvsroot

Vince.
--
==========================================================================
Vince Vielhaber -- KA8CSH    email: vev@michvhf.com    http://www.pop4.net
         56K Nationwide Dialup from $16.00/mo at Pop4 Networking
        Online Campground Directory    http://www.camping-usa.com
       Online Giftshop Superstore    http://www.cloudninegifts.com
==========================================================================

On Sun, 23 Sep 2001, Dave Page wrote:

> > In fact I use CVS, since I have to do some changes in the
> > driver. (My app uses the keywords limit, offset and position)
> > But I can't reach CVS anymore.
> > Even the web interface doesn't work anymore. Hiroshi told me to try:
> >
> > :pserver:anoncvs@anoncvs.postgresql.org:/projects/cvsroot
> >
> > Now I can log in. But the module path is not valid anymore:
> >
> > pgsql/src/interfaces/odbc

Try now ... I believe we fixed this last night ...

On Sun, 23 Sep 2001, Vince Vielhaber wrote:

> On Sun, 23 Sep 2001, Dave Page wrote:
>
> >
> >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Johann Zuschlag [mailto:zuschlag2@online.de]
> > > Sent: 23 September 2001 16:29
> > > To: Dave Page
> > > Subject: Re: [ODBC] New driver options in 7.01.0007
> > >
> > >
> > > Hi Dave,
> > >
> > > On Sun, 23 Sep 2001 15:39:55 +0100, Dave Page wrote:
> > >
> > > >> Since the PostgreSQL website isn't updated anymore,
> > > >
> > > >???
> > > Well, since I can't subscribe all mailing list, I just follow
> > > them on the web. The last entries are from sept 13th.
> >
> > You'll need to take that up with the listmasters.
>
> But to subscribe, check out the new links to the subscription form in
> the users lounge and the new developer's site.
>
> [snip]
>
> > > :pserver:anoncvs@anoncvs.postgresql.org:/projects/cvsroot
>
> Shouldn't that be:
>
> :pserver:anoncvs@anoncvs.postgresql.org:/cvsroot

cvs == /cvsroot
anoncvs == /projects/cvsroot

Johann Zuschlag wrote:
>
> On Sat, 22 Sep 2001 09:24:14 +0900, Hiroshi Inoue wrote:
>
> >Maybe yes at least for static cursors
> >and it may be a true option in the future.
> >However I'm not sure if I should do it.
> >I'm disappointed with some 7.2 changes
> >which lost the premises of my plan and
> >it's possible for me to lose my all premises
> >in the future.
>
> Since the PostgreSQL website isn't updated anymore,
> I didn't follow the discussion. Which changes do you mean?
> Did you lose all your new work? Or what do you mean
> with all premises? The whole driver?

My work about updatable cursors may lose the
meaing by a backend's change. My plan depends
on the combination of TID and OID but OIDs would
be optional in 7.2.
Strictly speaking we couldn't use xmin for
row versioning in 7.2 but we have to continue
the use of xmin becuase there's no alternative.
Unfortunately I don't understand what to depend on.

>
> >Hmm I'm not good at English. I'm happy to
> >change it if you give an appropriate option name.
>
> No, no your english is ok.
> (saying this, I'm not a native english speaking person)
>
> >Most driver options could be set per each DSN now.
> >'Common' is the default setting of them.
> >If you add a new DSN you would see the content
> >of the default setting at first.
>
> I thought it must be something like this.
> I just tested it. So 'Common' shows you the
> default setting and you can change that now.
> Good feature!
> What puzzles me a bit is that I would expect
> a new window where I could change the
> default behaviour.
> Hmm, why don't we call it 'show/change default'?
> Or something similiar.
> Even though a new window would clarify things.

OK I changed *Common* --> *Default* anyway.
Could someone refine the current dialogs ?

regards,
Hiroshi Inoue

Dave Page wrote:
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Hiroshi Inoue [mailto:Inoue@tpf.co.jp]
> > Sent: 24 September 2001 01:48
> > To: Johann Zuschlag
> > Cc: pgsql-odbc@postgresql.org
> > Subject: Re: [ODBC] New driver options in 7.01.0007
> >
> >
> > My work about updatable cursors may lose the
> > meaing by a backend's change. My plan depends
> > on the combination of TID and OID but OIDs would
> > be optional in 7.2.
>
> What?? OIDs optional?? That will *seriously* break pgAdmin at first thought.
> If anyone can give more info on this it would be appreciated as I can't seem
> to get to the list archives at the moment.

The following system tables don't have OIDs.

    relname     | relhasoids
----------------+------------
 pg_attribute   | f
 pg_group       | f
 pg_inherits    | f
 pg_index       | f
 pg_amop        | f
 pg_amproc      | f
 pg_largeobject | f
 pg_listener    | f
 pg_shadow      | f
 pg_attrdef     | f
 pg_description | f
 pg_relcheck    | f
 pg_statistic   | f
(13 rows)

regards,
Hiroshi Inoue

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Hiroshi Inoue [mailto:Inoue@tpf.co.jp]
> Sent: 24 September 2001 01:48
> To: Johann Zuschlag
> Cc: pgsql-odbc@postgresql.org
> Subject: Re: [ODBC] New driver options in 7.01.0007
>
>
> My work about updatable cursors may lose the
> meaing by a backend's change. My plan depends
> on the combination of TID and OID but OIDs would
> be optional in 7.2.


What?? OIDs optional?? That will *seriously* break pgAdmin at first thought.
If anyone can give more info on this it would be appreciated as I can't seem
to get to the list archives at the moment.

Regards, Dave.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Hiroshi Inoue [mailto:Inoue@tpf.co.jp]
> Sent: 24 September 2001 08:48
> To: Dave Page
> Cc: pgsql-odbc@postgresql.org; 'pgadmin-hackers@postgresql.org'
> Subject: Re: [ODBC] New driver options in 7.01.0007
>
>
> Dave Page wrote:
> >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Hiroshi Inoue [mailto:Inoue@tpf.co.jp]
> > > Sent: 24 September 2001 01:48
> > > To: Johann Zuschlag
> > > Cc: pgsql-odbc@postgresql.org
> > > Subject: Re: [ODBC] New driver options in 7.01.0007
> > >
> > >
> > > My work about updatable cursors may lose the
> > > meaing by a backend's change. My plan depends
> > > on the combination of TID and OID but OIDs would
> > > be optional in 7.2.
> >
> > What?? OIDs optional?? That will *seriously* break pgAdmin at first
> > thought. If anyone can give more info on this it would be
> appreciated
> > as I can't seem to get to the list archives at the moment.
>
> The following system tables don't have OIDs.
>
>     relname     | relhasoids
> ----------------+------------
>  pg_attribute   | f
>  pg_group       | f
>  pg_inherits    | f
>  pg_index       | f
>  pg_amop        | f
>  pg_amproc      | f
>  pg_largeobject | f
>  pg_listener    | f
>  pg_shadow      | f
>  pg_attrdef     | f
>  pg_description | f
>  pg_relcheck    | f
>  pg_statistic   | f

Thanks Hiroshi. That's less of a problem than I first imagined, but it will
probably still break pgAdmin completely.

I assume there's a good reason for removing them?

Regards, Dave.

Dave Page wrote:

> > > What?? OIDs optional?? That will *seriously* break pgAdmin at first
> > > thought. If anyone can give more info on this it would be
> > appreciated
> > > as I can't seem to get to the list archives at the moment.
> >
> > The following system tables don't have OIDs.
> >
> >     relname     | relhasoids
> > ----------------+------------
> >  pg_attribute   | f
> >  pg_group       | f
> >  pg_inherits    | f
> >  pg_index       | f
> >  pg_amop        | f
> >  pg_amproc      | f
> >  pg_largeobject | f
> >  pg_listener    | f
> >  pg_shadow      | f
> >  pg_attrdef     | f
> >  pg_description | f
> >  pg_relcheck    | f
> >  pg_statistic   | f
>
> Thanks Hiroshi. That's less of a problem than I first imagined, but it will
> probably still break pgAdmin completely.
>
> I assume there's a good reason for removing them?

PostgreSQL doesn't need/use their OIDs internally.
For example (attrelid, attnum) identifies the tuple
in pg_attribute properly. In addition they have
no index on thier OIDs and so the access to the
table via the OIDs aren't effective if the tables
are pretty large.

regards,
Hiroshi Inoue

On Sun, 23 Sep 2001 17:55:22 -0400 (EDT), Vince Vielhaber wrote:

>But to subscribe, check out the new links to the subscription form in
>the users lounge and the new developer's site.

I have got a subscription but disabled it. I prefer to read the
user mailing lists from the browser.
>> > :pserver:anoncvs@anoncvs.postgresql.org:/projects/cvsroot
>
>Shouldn't that be:
>
>:pserver:anoncvs@anoncvs.postgresql.org:/cvsroot
>
No, doesn't work anymore. At least ist doesn't work anymore
with the password 'postgresql'.

regards,


Johann Zuschlag
zuschlag2@online.de

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Dave Page
> > >
> > > What?? OIDs optional?? That will *seriously* break pgAdmin at first
> > > thought. If anyone can give more info on this it would be
> > appreciated
> > > as I can't seem to get to the list archives at the moment.
> >
> > The following system tables don't have OIDs.
> >
> >     relname     | relhasoids
> > ----------------+------------
> >  pg_attribute   | f
> >  pg_group       | f
> >  pg_inherits    | f
> >  pg_index       | f
> >  pg_amop        | f
> >  pg_amproc      | f
> >  pg_largeobject | f
> >  pg_listener    | f
> >  pg_shadow      | f
> >  pg_attrdef     | f
> >  pg_description | f
> >  pg_relcheck    | f
> >  pg_statistic   | f
>
> Thanks Hiroshi. That's less of a problem than I first imagined,
> but it will
> probably still break pgAdmin completely.

Note that restoring from pg_dump would abort if there
are pgAdmin tables.

regards,
Hiroshi Inoue

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Hiroshi Inoue [mailto:Inoue@tpf.co.jp]
> Sent: 01 October 2001 21:31
> To: Dave Page
> Cc: pgsql-odbc@postgresql.org; pgadmin-hackers@postgresql.org
> Subject: Re: [ODBC] New driver options in 7.01.0007

[snip bit about missing OIDs in PostgreSQL 7.2]

> >
> > Thanks Hiroshi. That's less of a problem than I first imagined,
> > but it will
> > probably still break pgAdmin completely.

It did break it, but pgAdmin is now fixed and more or less 7.2 ready :-)

> Note that restoring from pg_dump would abort if there
> are pgAdmin tables.

Umm, that would imply that pg_dump is broken - there's nothing special about
the tables that pgAdmin creates. Do you have any more info on this please?

Regards, Dave.

Dave Page wrote:
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Hiroshi Inoue [mailto:Inoue@tpf.co.jp]
> > Sent: 01 October 2001 21:31
> > To: Dave Page
> > Cc: pgsql-odbc@postgresql.org; pgadmin-hackers@postgresql.org
> > Subject: Re: [ODBC] New driver options in 7.01.0007
>
> It did break it, but pgAdmin is now fixed and more or less 7.2 ready :-)
>
> > Note that restoring from pg_dump would abort if there
> > are pgAdmin tables.
>
> Umm, that would imply that pg_dump is broken - there's nothing special about
> the tables that pgAdmin creates. Do you have any more info on this please?

I don't remember well. Doesn't old pgAdmin have a view
which contains an OID column of some system tables ?

regards,
Hiroshi Inoue

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Hiroshi Inoue [mailto:Inoue@tpf.co.jp]
> Sent: 02 October 2001 08:18
> To: Dave Page
> Cc: pgsql-odbc@postgresql.org; pgadmin-hackers@postgresql.org
> Subject: Re: [ODBC] New driver options in 7.01.0007
>
>
> Dave Page wrote:
> >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Hiroshi Inoue [mailto:Inoue@tpf.co.jp]
> > > Sent: 01 October 2001 21:31
> > > To: Dave Page
> > > Cc: pgsql-odbc@postgresql.org; pgadmin-hackers@postgresql.org
> > > Subject: Re: [ODBC] New driver options in 7.01.0007
> >
> > It did break it, but pgAdmin is now fixed and more or less
> 7.2 ready
> > :-)
> >
> > > Note that restoring from pg_dump would abort if there
> > > are pgAdmin tables.
> >
> > Umm, that would imply that pg_dump is broken - there's
> nothing special
> > about the tables that pgAdmin creates. Do you have any more info on
> > this please?
>
> I don't remember well. Doesn't old pgAdmin have a view
> which contains an OID column of some system tables ?

Ahh, yes, I see what you mean. I'm not sure about the best way to fix that -
it won't be fixed in pgAdmin anyway as that version is not being updated
anymore - The new one doesn't use any views or functions.

I'll write a notice about the problem and how to get round it and post it to
whereever I can.

Regards, Dave.