Re: RE : location of config parameter?

On Sun, 18 Dec 2011 11:00:06 +0100
"Ludo Brands" <[email protected]> wrote:

> I have no problems sharing the changes I made. 

Thank you for that offer, Ludo.  

> - since this is a sybase only extension, I assume the
> TDS_REQ_LARGEIDENT capability request should be set only for recent
> Sybase servers, based on the existence of the SYBECAPTYP error. What
> are the possibilities? 

I see no need to worry about capacity negotiation with old Sybase
servers.  

>From the design of the packet and Sybase's track record, I bet old
servers simply ignore (or acknowledge in the negative) capacity
requests they don't recognize. If you're a server that supports 65
capacity bits and I'm a client asking for #83, you can easily and
safely say No.  

If someone reading this message knows of a new Sybase client that cannot
connect to an old Sybase server (that supports TDS 5.0), that would
certainly be evidence to the contrary.  

Absent that evidence, we can at least start with no switch.  That has
the advantage of simplicity and of expoiting new servers, which is, er,
the way of the future.  

Regarding ENABLE_EXTRA_CHECKS, I would remove outdated code from
compilation until someone gets around to updating it.  Just put

	# if CAPACITY_8_BYTES

around the obsolete validation for now.  If you want to fix the
validation instead, that's fine, too.  

--jkl