> From: Rob Ransbottom [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
>
> On Tue, 11 Sep 2001, Wilson, Doug wrote:
>
> This I understand. But it seems that the purpose of
> fetchrow_hashref is to iterate through the results
> without committing to grabbing them all.
Right. You can still iterate through the results.
And every hash would have the same keys but different
values.
> This seems
> to imply more than one row, especially as there is
> no selectrow_hashref.
There is a selectrow_hashref. But it doesn't seem to be well
documented yet :) (Tim??)
>
> If I want a hashref it seems that in all but exceptionally
> well defined situations I would need a unique ref.
Only if you want to save that hashref somewhere. If you're just
processing data row by row, then there's no need for a unique hash(ref).
This is essentially the same behavior of fetchrow_arrayref.
> Is there some thought that the actual hash will be partly
> preserved, thus saving time?
Maybe?? Once the first fetch establishes the keys, only the
values will change.
-Douglas Wilson
