Re: CallableStatement and getUpdateCount

From: "Albe Laurenz" <laurenz(dot)albe(at)wien(dot)gv(dot)at>
To: "Kris Jurka *EXTERN*" <books(at)ejurka(dot)com>
Cc: "Sam Lawrence *EXTERN*" <sam(at)fsbtech(dot)com>, <pgsql-jdbc(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: CallableStatement and getUpdateCount
Date: 2008-04-02 08:25:30
Message-ID: D960CB61B694CF459DCFB4B0128514C201F3E94E@exadv11.host.magwien.gv.at
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-jdbc

Kris Jurka wrote:
> > Hmmm. getUpdateCount() is defined in
> > org/postgresql/jdbc2/AbstractJdbc2Statement.java as
> >
> > if (isFunction)
> > return 1;
>
> I would guess that this code was conceived without regard to returning
> sets. For code that does {? = call f()} you expect the caller to fetch
> the result using CallableStatement.getXXX() so that's why the code isn't
> indicating that a ResultSet is returned even though there is one under the
> hood. The JDBC driver has no idea whether the function it's calling is
> returning a SETOF or not, so it can't use that to determine what to return
> for getUpdateCount.
>
> Perhaps we can differentiate between calls of the form {call f()} and {? =
> call f()} ?

If I understood correctly then there *is* a result set in the case mentioned.

Would it work as desired if the two checks in getUpdateCount were reversed?

if (result.getResultSet() != null)
return -1;

if (isFunction)
return 1;

Or is there a problem I do not see?

Yours,
Laurenz Albe

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-jdbc by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Shavonne Marietta Wijesinghe 2008-04-02 09:40:35 Re: JSP to PostgreSql
Previous Message Guillaume Smet 2008-04-02 01:04:04 Re: Re: [HACKERS] How embarrassing: optimization of a one-shot query doesn't work