On Tue, Jul 21, 2015 at 01:33:34PM +0100, Martin J. Evans wrote:
Long, sorry.
No problem. The whole topic is a bit of a mess.
On 20/07/15 18:00, Tim Bunce wrote:
On Mon, Jul 20, 2015 at 02:54:53PM +0100, Martin J. Evans wrote:
On 20/07/15 14:15, Tim Bunce wrote:
I think that would work
Long, sorry.
On 20/07/15 18:00, Tim Bunce wrote:
On Mon, Jul 20, 2015 at 02:54:53PM +0100, Martin J. Evans wrote:
On 20/07/15 14:15, Tim Bunce wrote:
I think that would work for me - I'm happy to test it our here if you want to
give it a go.
IIRC, when this was last discussed the problem is
On 21/07/15 15:03, Tim Bunce wrote:
On Tue, Jul 21, 2015 at 01:33:34PM +0100, Martin J. Evans wrote:
Long, sorry.
No problem. The whole topic is a bit of a mess.
On 20/07/15 18:00, Tim Bunce wrote:
On Mon, Jul 20, 2015 at 02:54:53PM +0100, Martin J. Evans wrote:
On 20/07/15 14:15, Tim
On 19/07/15 15:41, Tim Bunce wrote:
On Thu, Jul 16, 2015 at 10:46:35AM -0700, David E. Wheeler wrote:
On Jul 16, 2015, at 6:40 AM, Tim Bunce tim.bu...@pobox.com wrote:
Well, this contains lots more light! ...
- dbd_st_execute for 03fdf4e0
parse_params statement
SELECT c.change_id
On Mon, Jul 20, 2015 at 08:55:40AM +0100, Martin J. Evans wrote:
On 19/07/15 15:41, Tim Bunce wrote:
Please also see the issue I reported in DBI back in 2012:
https://rt.cpan.org/Ticket/Display.html?id=81911
I had to add various workarounds and a warning to DBD::ODBC.
Ah, thanks for the
On Sun, Jul 19, 2015 at 06:39:59PM -0700, David E. Wheeler wrote:
On Jul 19, 2015, at 7:41 AM, Tim Bunce tim.bu...@pobox.com wrote:
Internally the DBI has a DBIc_ROW_COUNT(sth) macro that has an IV type.
That's a signed int that would be 64 bits on most modern systems.
On many of those
On 20/07/15 14:15, Tim Bunce wrote:
On Mon, Jul 20, 2015 at 08:55:40AM +0100, Martin J. Evans wrote:
On 19/07/15 15:41, Tim Bunce wrote:
Please also see the issue I reported in DBI back in 2012:
https://rt.cpan.org/Ticket/Display.html?id=81911
I had to add various workarounds and a warning
On Mon, Jul 20, 2015 at 02:54:53PM +0100, Martin J. Evans wrote:
On 20/07/15 14:15, Tim Bunce wrote:
I think that would work for me - I'm happy to test it our here if you want to
give it a go.
IIRC, when this was last discussed the problem is that some drivers
might not set
On Mon, Jul 20, 2015 at 06:00:53PM +0100, Tim Bunce wrote:
On Mon, Jul 20, 2015 at 02:54:53PM +0100, Martin J. Evans wrote:
I also noticed something I should have seen before: dbd_st_rows() is
defined as returning an int. I _think_ it would be safe to change the
definition to returning an IV
On Jul 19, 2015, at 7:41 AM, Tim Bunce tim.bu...@pobox.com wrote:
Internally the DBI has a DBIc_ROW_COUNT(sth) macro that has an IV type.
That's a signed int that would be 64 bits on most modern systems.
On many of those systems the plain int type might be 32 bits.
I've just pushed an
On Thu, Jul 16, 2015 at 10:46:35AM -0700, David E. Wheeler wrote:
On Jul 16, 2015, at 6:40 AM, Tim Bunce tim.bu...@pobox.com wrote:
Well, this contains lots more light! ...
- dbd_st_execute for 03fdf4e0
parse_params statement
SELECT c.change_id ...
Binding parameters:
11 matches
Mail list logo
