Please read the mail headers, especially
List-Post: <mailto:dbi-users@perl.org>
List-Help: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
List-Id: <dbi-users.perl.org>
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/0,6868,296117-2006-60,00.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:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
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:
<http://www.xray.mpe.mpg.de/mailing-lists/dbi/2005-02/msg00085.html>
Has this patch been already applied?
Yes, http://www.xray.mpe.mpg.de/mailing-lists/dbi/2005-02/msg00125.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:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.foken.de/alexander/
