We've removed that exception anyway. :-) Popular community vote.
On Mon, Oct 5, 2009 at 12:07 AM, Guy Rouillier <guyr-...@burntmail.com>wrote: > Ignore this. I realized after taking a break that it doesn't work with > primitive types. I think the thing I find most frustrating with Java is > that it doesn't treat primitive types in a consistent manner with classes > derived from Object. > > > Guy Rouillier wrote: > >> Currently, performing a single row select throws an exception if zero or >> > 1 rows are returned. While this is certainly workable, an alternative >> that would be easier on the programmer would be to set the result to null if >> no rows are found, and only throw an exception if > 1 rows are found. >> >> The documentation suggests doing a count to determine what situation you >> are in, then issuing the appropriate select once you know. But that will >> result in an extra trip to the DB. In a common scenario where you are >> querying a primary key, you know that you will get zero or one row back. So >> rather than having to put the single row select into a try-catch block, a >> more natural paradigm would be to assign the result and then check the >> result for null. >> >> > > -- > Guy Rouillier > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: user-java-unsubscr...@ibatis.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: user-java-h...@ibatis.apache.org > >
