Re: "Fix affected rows after insert with prepared query" side effect

> On Apr 30, 2016, at 4:23 PM, Frediano Ziglio <[email protected]> wrote:
> 
> Now works much better. Please try last RC (4).
> 
> Frediano
> 

Looks good. 
Thank you!
John 

> 
> 2016-04-24 16:55 GMT+01:00 John Kendall <[email protected]>:
>> Sorry, my last post had the wrong link to sybase infocenter.
>> 
>> 2016-04-23 13:04 GMT+01:00 Frediano Ziglio <freddy77 at gmail.com>:
>> 
>>> 2016-04-22 1:03 GMT+01:00 John Kendall <john at capps.com>:
>>> 
>>>> Thu, 21 Apr 2016 11:04:54 +0100 Frediano Ziglio <freddy77 at gmail.com>
>>>> 
>>>>> 2016-04-21 8:00 GMT+01:00 John Kendall <john at capps.com>:
>>>>>> On Oct 19, 2015 this patch was applied to ct.c:
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> "Fix affected rows after insert with prepared query"
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> This patch has the side-effect of a 'rows affected' being displayed for every
>>>>>> select statement within a ASE stored procedure. For example, sp_help returns
>>>>>> 136 extra 'rows affected' lines. See below. Backing out this patch stops this from
>>>>>> happening. I only tested this on sp_help, but I figured that was enough. FYI, this
>>>>>> patch does not have this effect on MS SQL 2008's sp_help sproc.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> John
>>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> I'm not sure if this is a regression or an improvement. I have to
>>>>> check what's the original CT-Library behaviour.
>>>>> 
>>>>> Frediano
>>>> 
>>>> Hi, Frediano.
>>>> 
>>>> I compiled sqsh against Sybase 16 libs and it does not return all those 'rows affected'
>>>> lines. I could be reading it wrong, but in the archives, it appears the patch applied was
>>>> not the one requested by David Nichols.
>>>> 
>>> 
>>> There was another patch that make the change the same.
>>> 
>>>> http://lists.ibiblio.org/pipermail/freetds/2015q4/029631.html
>>>> 
>>>> Could we remove that patch?
>>>> 
>>> 
>>> I don't think so. But probably the patch fixed an issue and introduced a problem
>>> so we should find a solution. I think that Dave/Ondrei wanted to have the row
>>> number returned by a DONEINPROC in the case of a prepared statement. This
>>> does not mean they want all DONEINPROC from the server.
>>> 
>>> Basically
>>> - before: no DONEINPROC
>>> - after: all DONEINPROC
>>> - wanted (you): one DONEINPROC (which one and how still to be defined)
>>> Does this make sense?
>> 
>> 
>> Yes.
>> 
>> As far as I can tell, it should only return the count for the last statement that could affect rows:
>> 
>> http://infocenter.sybase.com/help/index.jsp?topic=/com.sybase.infocenter.dc36065.1570/html/ctlibmig/X65200.htm
>> 
>> So, the last insert, delete or update, perhaps?
>> 
>> 
>> 
>>>> Thanks,
>>> 
>>>> John
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>> 
>>> I think this is the only no-build issue we had since the 1.0 RC. Not bad! Frediano >
>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> sqsh> sp_help Movetype
>>>>>> (1 row affected)
>>>>>> Name Owner Object_type
>>>>>> -------------------------------- -------------------- ----------------------------------------
>>>>>> Movetype dbo user table
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Column_name Type Length Pre
>>>>>> ------------------------------------------------ ---------------- ------------------------ ---
>>>>>> movetype char 2 NUL
>>>>>> move_desc char 20 NUL
>>>>>> move_revenue bit 1 NUL
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> (1 row affected)
>>>>>> (1 row affected)
>>>>>> (1 row affected)
>>>>>> (0 rows affected)
>>>>>> (1 row affected)
>>>>>> (0 rows affected)
>>>>>> (1 row affected)
>>>>>> (1 row affected)
>>>>>> (1 row affected)
>>>>>> (1 row affected)
>>>>>> (1 row affected)
>>>>>> (1 row affected)
>>>>>> (1 row affected)
>>>>>> Object has the following indexes
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> (1 row affected)
>>>>>> (1 row affected)
>>>>>> ... etc
>>>>>> <snip>
>> _______________________________________________
>> FreeTDS mailing list
>> [email protected]
>> http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/freetds
>