Hi Clinton,
Just a bit confused.
Want to clarify this thing.
Do you mean to say that when a EXTERNAL transaction manager is used, the
startTransaction will start a new transaction and will not participate in the
parent transaction. And if the JTA transaction manager is used,
Title: Inserting null into SQLServer DATETIME field
Hi,
java.sql.Types.DATETIME does not exist in
Java 1.4, we use TIMESTAMP, see the API of your Java-version
Niels
From: Matthew Hegarty
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: woensdag 19 oktober 2005
11:01
To:
Title: Inserting null into SQLServer DATETIME field
Thanks - that seems to have sorted it.
For some reason I thought you specified the DB field type
in the mapping, not the java type.
From: Niels Beekman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: 19 October 2005 10:06To:
I'm getting this exception when trying to start my web app in Tomcat5.
my sql-map-config.xml file contains:
?xml version=1.0 encoding=UTF-8?
!DOCTYPE sqlMapConfig PUBLIC -//iBATIS.com//DTD SQL Map Config
2.0//EN http://www.ibatis.com/dtd/sql-map-config-2.dtd;
sqlMapConfig
Sorry, I've found it. Hadn't closed a tag correctly. What a stupid
mistake, and I'd spent ages looking for it too.
David Moss wrote:
I'm getting this exception when trying to start my web app in Tomcat5.
my sql-map-config.xml file contains:
?xml version=1.0 encoding=UTF-8?
!DOCTYPE
Rao, Satish wrote:
Message
Hi
Mike,
Thanks
for the prompt response.
If
we run the PL/SQL via SQL Plus, we don't experience the same delay
(there are about a million records in the database)
As
far as the database is concerned, we don't have much insight into the
Sorry Reuben, but I'm not quite clear on how you're loading your
SqlMaps classes within Spring. The reason that I'm wondering about
your Spring configuration is because I came across the same issue a
while back and fixed it by explicitly setting the dataSource property
of Spring's
Satish,
I am using the same and suspect that the problem you are experiencing
is with the proc.
try this is sqlplus
set timing on
var results refcursor;
exec your_procedure( your_params, :results ); -- for a procedure
exec :results := your_function( your_params ); -- for a function
print
Please attach the changed code to the JIRA issue. As far as changing
the access modifiers, I am all for it - I have had to do similar
things, and protected still provides an adequate layer of
idiot-proofing while (as you said) not changing any existing behavior.
IMO, protected means use at your
