| From: | Kris Jurka <books(at)ejurka(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Oliver Jowett <oliver(at)opencloud(dot)com> |
| Cc: | ALBERDI Ion <alberdi(at)enseirb(dot)fr>, pgsql-jdbc(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: PoolingDataSource executeUpdate |
| Date: | 2004-06-24 06:35:18 |
| Message-ID: | Pine.BSO.4.56.0406240134001.27120@leary.csoft.net |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-jdbc |
On Thu, 24 Jun 2004, Oliver Jowett wrote:
> ALBERDI Ion wrote:
>
> > What happens there is that with Connection Pooling the executeUpdate method
> > always returns 0, and that the database is not upgraded.
> > I'm currently forced to use the Jdbc3SimpleDataSource class (with this class
> > the application runs perfectly) but I would like to use Connection Pools to
> > improve the application's performances.
>
> I notice that the default autocommit setting in
> org.postgresql.jdbc2.optional.ConnectionPool is false. This is the
> opposite of the required Connection default and seems like a bug to me.
True, but that doesn't explain why executeUpdate returns an affected row
count of zero.
Kris Jurka
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Kris Jurka | 2004-06-24 07:01:52 | Re: Blob getBinaryStream issue. |
| Previous Message | Oliver Jowett | 2004-06-24 02:38:48 | Re: PoolingDataSource executeUpdate |