Lukas,
I cross-posted as I was unsure as to where the solution may lay, and am
still pretty much in the same boat.
I'm not in a hurry to over-ride the PreparedStatement usage. I will
experiment as you've outlined but I'll have to weigh the injection
risk. Mainly I'm curious as to how this re-use is occurring and if
there's any corrective action in my general scheme. An explicit closing
of the db connection perhaps? (The suggestion to augment the connection
url with "?prepareThreshold=0" does not appear to change the outcome.)
On 08/31/2017 01:35 AM, Lukas Eder wrote:
Hi Rob,
Thanks for the cross-post, that's a very interesting technique to
share knowledge across communities.
I'm just going to briefly comment on the jOOQ part, inline:
2017-08-30 18:20 GMT+02:00 Rob Sargent <[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>>:
I am NOT using PreparedStatment in my code.
jOOQ by default uses PreparedStatements, not static statements, and
from what can be seen in your logs, this is confirmed.
If you want to force jOOQ to send static statements to the server, you
can specify
Settings.statementType = StatementType.STATIC_STATEMENT
This is documented here:
https://www.jooq.org/doc/latest/manual/sql-execution/statement-type
Hope this helps,
Lukas
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups "jOOQ User Group" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send
an email to [email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "jOOQ User
Group" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to [email protected].
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
