On 11/02/11 10:36, H.Merijn Brand wrote:
> On Fri, 11 Feb 2011 10:14:12 +, "Martin J. Evans"
> wrote:
>
>> On 11/02/11 09:05, H.Merijn Brand wrote:
>>> On Fri, 11 Feb 2011 08:42:21 +, "Martin J. Evans"
>>> wrote:
>>>
On 10/02/11 22:27, Greg Sabino Mullane wrote:
>
>> Trace l
On Fri, 11 Feb 2011 10:14:12 +, "Martin J. Evans"
wrote:
> On 11/02/11 09:05, H.Merijn Brand wrote:
> > On Fri, 11 Feb 2011 08:42:21 +, "Martin J. Evans"
> > wrote:
> >
> >> On 10/02/11 22:27, Greg Sabino Mullane wrote:
> >>>
> Trace level is no good to get DBD only tracing since l
On 11/02/11 09:05, H.Merijn Brand wrote:
> On Fri, 11 Feb 2011 08:42:21 +, "Martin J. Evans"
> 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, so
On Fri, 11 Feb 2011 08:42:21 +, "Martin J. Evans"
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 comingl
On 10/02/11 23:47, Tim Bunce wrote:
> On Sun, Feb 06, 2011 at 02:39:09PM +, Martin J. Evans wrote:
>> On 06/02/2011 13:00, Tim Bunce wrote:
>>> On Sat, Feb 05, 2011 at 01:27:11PM +, Martin J. Evans wrote:
> ok, the 3 new trace flags are in and I added macros (slight shame
> you cann
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 speak
On Sun, Feb 06, 2011 at 02:39:09PM +, Martin J. Evans wrote:
> On 06/02/2011 13:00, Tim Bunce wrote:
> >On Sat, Feb 05, 2011 at 01:27:11PM +, Martin J. Evans wrote:
> >>>ok, the 3 new trace flags are in and I added macros (slight shame
> >>>you cannot use them in DBI.pm too but not a great
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: RIPEMD160
> 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
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: RIPEMD160
> As DBD::Unify uses levels only at the moment, there was no way to
> *ONLY* get the DBD trace/debug messages without also getting the DBI
> messages, as I shared DBI's trace level. This only became an issue once
> the DBD was getting useful. In
Greg,
I've tried to add some background to explain where these changes came from. I
know Merijn has replied already. Personally, I don't need any extra space for
DBD only level tracing as I now mostly use flags but I have no objection to
Merijn adding it.
On 09/02/11 02:53, Greg Sabino Mullane
On Wed, 9 Feb 2011 02:53:09 -, "Greg Sabino Mullane"
wrote:
Sorry that this is a long post, but maybe that is the best way to state
what I am aiming at
> > Apparently some DBDs only want DBD tracing and not DBI tracing so
> > trace level is no good as it always includes DBI tracing. I thin
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: RIPEMD160
> Apparently some DBDs only want DBD tracing and not DBI tracing so
> trace level is no good as it always includes DBI tracing. I think you
> were talking about reserving some space for DBDs only - perhaps you
> could remind us - the idea bei
On 06/02/2011 13:00, Tim Bunce wrote:
On Sat, Feb 05, 2011 at 01:27:11PM +, Martin J. Evans wrote:
ok, the 3 new trace flags are in and I added macros (slight shame
you cannot use them in DBI.pm too but not a great deal).
I think they should be added to the ALIAS list in constant().
Which
On Sun, Feb 06, 2011 at 01:17:15PM +0100, H.Merijn Brand wrote:
> > >
> > > # 0xddlDDDrL (driver, driver-level, DBI, reserved, Level)
> > >
> > > would be perfect in my world.
> >
> > That's fine.
> >
> > > l than is "level" to DBD, what "L" is to DBI
> > >
> > > How many bits in do you
On Sat, Feb 05, 2011 at 01:27:11PM +, Martin J. Evans wrote:
> >
> >ok, the 3 new trace flags are in and I added macros (slight shame
> >you cannot use them in DBI.pm too but not a great deal).
I think they should be added to the ALIAS list in constant().
> All done in DBD::ODBC, tested and c
On 06/02/2011 11:16, H.Merijn Brand wrote:
On Sat, 5 Feb 2011 12:29:09 +, Tim Bunce
wrote:
On Fri, Feb 04, 2011 at 08:00:13PM +, Martin J. Evans wrote:
Tim,
At the LPW I think I promised to add connection and encoding trace
flags to DBI which add to the already existing SQL flag. I ne
On Sun, 6 Feb 2011 12:09:35 +, Tim Bunce
wrote:
> On Sun, Feb 06, 2011 at 12:16:33PM +0100, H.Merijn Brand wrote:
> > On Sat, 5 Feb 2011 12:29:09 +, Tim Bunce
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > As you note above, the current trace settings are encoded into an int:
> > >
> > > # 0xdd
On Sun, Feb 06, 2011 at 12:16:33PM +0100, H.Merijn Brand wrote:
> On Sat, 5 Feb 2011 12:29:09 +, Tim Bunce
> wrote:
> >
> > As you note above, the current trace settings are encoded into an int:
> >
> > # 0xddrL (driver, DBI, reserved, Level)
> >
> > Where L is the DBI trace
On Sat, 5 Feb 2011 12:29:09 +, Tim Bunce
wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 04, 2011 at 08:00:13PM +, Martin J. Evans wrote:
> > Tim,
> >
> > At the LPW I think I promised to add connection and encoding trace
> > flags to DBI which add to the already existing SQL flag. I never got
> > around to it and
On 05/02/2011 12:54, Martin J. Evans wrote:
On 05/02/2011 12:34, Martin J. Evans wrote:
On 05/02/2011 12:29, Tim Bunce wrote:
On Fri, Feb 04, 2011 at 08:00:13PM +, Martin J. Evans wrote:
Tim,
At the LPW I think I promised to add connection and encoding trace
flags to DBI which add to the
On 05/02/2011 12:34, Martin J. Evans wrote:
On 05/02/2011 12:29, Tim Bunce wrote:
On Fri, Feb 04, 2011 at 08:00:13PM +, Martin J. Evans wrote:
Tim,
At the LPW I think I promised to add connection and encoding trace
flags to DBI which add to the already existing SQL flag. I never got
around
On 05/02/2011 12:29, Tim Bunce wrote:
On Fri, Feb 04, 2011 at 08:00:13PM +, Martin J. Evans wrote:
Tim,
At the LPW I think I promised to add connection and encoding trace
flags to DBI which add to the already existing SQL flag. I never got
around to it and Merijn reminded me today on #dbi.
On Fri, Feb 04, 2011 at 08:00:13PM +, Martin J. Evans wrote:
> Tim,
>
> At the LPW I think I promised to add connection and encoding trace
> flags to DBI which add to the already existing SQL flag. I never got
> around to it and Merijn reminded me today on #dbi. The change is
> trivial and onc
On 04/02/2011 20:00, Martin J. Evans wrote:
Tim,
At the LPW I think I promised to add connection and encoding trace
flags to DBI which add to the already existing SQL flag. I never got
around to it and Merijn reminded me today on #dbi. The change is
trivial and once implemented I will replace
Tim,
At the LPW I think I promised to add connection and encoding trace flags
to DBI which add to the already existing SQL flag. I never got around to
it and Merijn reminded me today on #dbi. The change is trivial and once
implemented I will replace DBD::ODBC trace flags for connection and
en
25 matches
Mail list logo
