Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: Patch for Statement.getGeneratedKeys()

From: Kris Jurka <books(at)ejurka(dot)com>
To: Ken Johanson <pg-user(at)kensystem(dot)com>
Cc: pgsql-jdbc(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Patch for Statement.getGeneratedKeys()
Date: 2008-01-11 05:22:09
Message-ID: (view raw, whole thread or download thread mbox)
Lists: pgsql-generalpgsql-jdbc

On Mon, 7 Jan 2008, Ken Johanson wrote:

>> 2) Shouldn't the result for a generated key result be stored in some place 
>> more specific?  Right now can't you issue executeQuery() and then call 
>> getGeneratedKeys()?
> Again I am not familiar with all the use cases but presume you mean, 
> allowing for calling a query (non-DML?) and then expect the keys to be 
> available?..

What I'm saying is that since the "result" variable is set for every 
ResultSet, someone can do executeQuery("SELECT ...") and then if they 
call getGeneratedKeys it will return a reference to that ResultSet. 
getGenereatedKeys should fail if it was not immediately preceded by a 
call that created a ResultSet of generated keys.

>> 4) As discussed previously on -general the code in executeUpdate(String, 
>> int[]) shouldn't be using information_schema because that has additional 
>> permission requirements.  Also it looks like it's got sql injection 
>> problems.
> I am waiting on this and #9.b; for an answer to a prior question about: 
> is it is possible to determine the connection's db and schema names to 
> normalize those array elements (in the case where just the 
> [schema]tablename is provided). Is it possible without a round trip to 
> know what these should be?

You can tell the connection's database via Connection.getCatalog, but 
there is no such thing as a connection's schema.  Each connection has a 
search_path that specifies the order it looks through schemas to find a 
table.  So you can't tell what schema a table is in without looking 
through the list.

>> 6) There's no need to split this up for translation purposes, just make it 
>> one string:
>>     throw new PSQLException("Server version does not support 
>> returning generated keys.")+" (< "+"8.2"+")", PSQLState.NOT_IMPLEMENTED);
> Unless the code will not work I will elect to keep support for translation 
> should someone want to enter these.

I'm not saying it shouldn't be translatable I'm just saying put the " 
< 8.2" part into the message string.

>> 10) What's the purpose of Utils.position?  How is this better than 
>> String.indexOf with lowercase strings?
> It save a potential buffer allocation should String.class find a case-fold is 
> necessary (esp in large query).
> query.toLowerCase().indexOf(s);
> Utils.position is not strictly needed and I will remove it if you prefer.

Let's take it out.

Kris Jurka

In response to


pgsql-jdbc by date

Next:From: Kris JurkaDate: 2008-01-11 05:24:35
Subject: Re: Patch for Statement.getGeneratedKeys()
Previous:From: Kris JurkaDate: 2008-01-11 05:12:24
Subject: Re: Timestamps without time zone

pgsql-general by date

Next:From: Kris JurkaDate: 2008-01-11 05:24:35
Subject: Re: Patch for Statement.getGeneratedKeys()
Previous:From: Martin GaintyDate: 2008-01-11 00:17:16
Subject: Re: How to automate password requests?

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2017 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group