Re: Possible strange problem in DBI::type_info()

Please read the mail headers, especially

List-Post:
List-Help:
List-Unsubscribe:
List-Subscribe:
List-Id:

and unsubscribe yourself!

Alexander


On 22.11.2006 21:29, Catrina Martin wrote:
> Please remove me from this group immediately.
>
> Catrina Martin
> Technical Recruiter
> TekPartners Government Services
> CCR Lookup: P2P Staffing Corp DBA TekPartners
> DC Office: 703-682-6916
> Web: www.tekpartners.com
> Vision. People. Service.
> TekPartners Quick Facts
>
> * TekPartners is a Service Disabled Veteran Owned Small
> Business (SDVOSB)
> * TekPartners has been named the 66th Fastest Growing New
> Company in America by PricewaterhouseCoopers & Entrepreneur Magazine as part
> of their 2006 HOT 100 list. Click on the following URL to view our selection
> on the HOT 100 list:
> http://www.entrepreneur.com/hot100/listings/0,6868,296117-20 06-60,00.html .
> * TekPartners was honored as the 2nd FASTEST GROWING
> technology company by the South Florida Business Journal.
> * TekPartners was honored as the 6th LARGEST Technology
> Consulting firm by the South Florida Business Journal.
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Tim Bunce [mailto:Tim.Bunce@pobox.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, November 22, 2006 8:33 AM
> To: Cosimo Streppone
> Cc: DBI Users; DBI Developers; Steffen Goeldner
> Subject: Re: Possible strange problem in DBI::type_info()
>
> On Wed, Nov 22, 2006 at 10:50:54AM +0100, Cosimo Streppone wrote:
>
>> Steffen Goeldner wrote:
>>
>>
>>> Cosimo Streppone wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hi all,
>>>>
>>>> I found a strange problem in DBI::type_info().
>>>> I don't know much of DBI internals. Only found that "sometimes",
>>>> the 'type_info_all' structure returned by the driver is
>>>> mangled by some shift() that happens in DBI::type_info().
>>>>
>>>>
>>> FTR: This was the reason for this patch:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>> Has this patch been already applied?
>>
>
> Yes, http://www.xray.mpe.mpg.de/mailing-lists/dbi/2005-02/msg0012 5.html
>
>
>> I found this "problem" with DBI 1.48. I didn't test it with 1.53.
>> Should I ?
>>
>
> The patch only addressed lib/DBI/DBD/Metadata.pm - driver authors would
> need to rerun metadata generation, as per the release notes:
>
> =head2 Changes in DBI 1.48 (svn rev 928), 14th March 2005
>
> Fixed DBI::DBD::Metadata generation of type_info_all thanks to Steffen
> Goeldner
> (driver authors who have used it should rerun it).
>
>
>
>>>> [...] No, bad. Probably it's better to change in DBI.pm.
>>>>
>>> Well, safety vs. efficiency - Tim should decide.
>>>
>> I think changing DBI.pm is both safer and more efficient,
>> because as far as I can understand, type_info_all() should be called
>> only once in the DBI lifetime.
>>
>> The fact that I'm seeing this problem is probably due to
>> multiple opening/closing of different DBI handles (for DBD::Pg &&
>> DBD::Informix together).
>>
>
> Yeap. I've made the change. Thanks Cosimo!
>
> Tim.
>
>
>


--
Alexander Foken
mailto:alexander@foken.de http://www.foken.de/alexander/