On Fri, 11 Feb 2011 08:42:21 +0000, "Martin J. Evans"
<martin.ev...@easysoft.com> wrote:
> On 10/02/11 22:27, Greg Sabino Mullane wrote:
> >
> >> Trace level is no good to get DBD only tracing since level
> >> 1 and 2 is for DBI and anything after that is DBD.
> >
> > Yes, sorry about that, I was being lazy in my comingling of
> > trace levels and trace flags.
> >
> >> In addition, at the LPW speaking to Tim I mentioned I had
> >> implemented some trace flags in DBD::ODBC which were probably
> >> generic in nature and agreed to add them to DBI.
> >
> > +1
> >
> >> Whilst I was there I thought I could sort the trace DBD only
> >> issue out as well by adding a DBD trace flag.
> > ...
> >> $dbh->trace('DBD');
> > ...
> >> Which is now duplicated in DBI for all DBDs.
> >> I didn't realise you did that and although I can see
> >> why it means you've added a flag with an uppercase
> >> name which is reserved for DBI. I'm not sure you'll
> >> ever see DBD in your parse_trace_flags after 1.617
> >> so you'll need to do something similar to what I
> >> did (below) in addition to keeping what you already
> >> have (above) to cover older DBIs before 1.617.
> >
> > Okay, all that is good to know. So it should do
> > the same thing post 1.617 and the dbd::pg specific
> > code will never fire, right?
> >
> > ...
>
> yup, if you OR your DBD flag with DBDs DBD flag nothing will change
> for you. If someone uses pre 1.617 you will work as before and 1.617
> you will continue to work but your flag will be redundant. When you
> eventually raise your requirement to DBI 1.617 you can take your DBD
> flag out.
>
> >> The ENC flag is for encoding tracing.
> >
> > Thanks for the explanation there, as well as all the others I
> > did not quote here.
> >
>
> BTW, on your comment to Merijn re dbd_verbose reinventing the wheel.
> That is how I felt and I did not want to add another test to all my
> trace tests which is why I added the DBD flag instead. I'm not
> criticising anyone using dbd_verbose, I just did not want to do it
> that way and would rather work with what was already present in DBI.
I don't see it as re-inventing the/a wheel. The DBD flag is for me like
an alias to dbd_verbose.
$DBD_VERBOSE = 7
is (or should be) equal to
$DBI_TRACE = 7|DBD
dbd_verbose has never been *new* functionality, It was implemented as a
shortcut for already existing trace features.
--
H.Merijn Brand http://tux.nl Perl Monger http://amsterdam.pm.org/
using 5.00307 through 5.12 and porting perl5.13.x on HP-UX 10.20, 11.00,
11.11, 11.23 and 11.31, OpenSuSE 10.1, 11.0 .. 11.3 and AIX 5.2 and 5.3.
http://mirrors.develooper.com/hpux/ http://www.test-smoke.org/
http://qa.perl.org http://www.goldmark.org/jeff/stupid-disclaimers/
