On Thu, May 7, 2009 at 12:08 PM, Mariano Martinez Peck < [email protected]> wrote:
> > > On Thu, May 7, 2009 at 11:58 AM, Mariano Martinez Peck < > [email protected]> wrote: > >> >> >> 2009/5/7 Hilaire Fernandes <[email protected]> >> >>> >>> 2009/5/7 Mariano Martinez Peck <[email protected]> >>> >>>> >>>> It would be nice you can then confirm me if you are using a TIMESTAMP >>>> or a DATETIME. Just to see if that was the problem. >>>> >>> >>> >>> Oops sorry, yes it is a timestamp (column named ts). I am not sure but it >>> may be a column automatically added by the MySql DB. >>> >> >> >> At least we know which is the problem :) >> >> As I said, the solution (sorry if it isn't good enough) is to use >> datetime. >> > > Sorry I forgot to said that the supported database types depends of the > backend. For example, in MySQL you must use datetime instead of timestamp, > but in oracle you can use timestamp. This is not our "limitation" but > openDBX one (or even client libraries). All this information is here: > http://www.linuxnetworks.de/doc/index.php/OpenDBX/DBMS_Datatypes > Sorry for the amount of mails but I am thinking just know. I can be very easy to alternative (not the default way) to return the field as String if it cannot be mapped or converted. In this case, suppose you have '2006-01-26 17:15:52' and there is no mapping for TIMESTAMP, I can mapped it to an String. This will let you fetch all the results without problem. The only problem is that you will have Strings objects instead of TimeStamp objects. What do you think ? Cheers, Mariano > > Cheers, > > Mariano > > > >> >> Cheers! >> >> Mariano >> >> >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Pharo-project mailing list >>> [email protected] >>> http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project >>> >> >> >
_______________________________________________ Pharo-project mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project
