Re: Return Codes of BatchUpdateException in PostgreSql 9.6
От | Jeremy Whiting |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Return Codes of BatchUpdateException in PostgreSql 9.6 |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 690688e2-6a85-bbe9-c8f4-0c221256747f@redhat.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Return Codes of BatchUpdateException in PostgreSql 9.6 (Tillmann Schulz <tillmann73@yahoo.de>) |
Список | pgsql-jdbc |
Hi, Can you check what is returned by the back end for 9.5 and 9.6. You will need to set logLevel=2 That will help to narrow down the problem. Jeremy On 13/10/16 14:24, Tillmann Schulz wrote: > The docu says: > If the driver continues processing after a failure (and this is the case in my example), BatchUpdateException.getUpdateCountswill have an element for every command. > > In my case there is an element for every command but all elements contain -3 (Statement.Execute_Failed) in postgres 9.6. > > I think only the failed statmements should been marked with -3! This behaviour is new in 9.6 and seems to be a bug. > > > Thanks > > Tillmann > > >> According to the doco, getUpdateCounts():- >> >> Returns: >> an array of int containing the update counts for the updates that >> were executed successfully before this error occurred. Or, if the >> driver continues to process commands after an error, one of the >> following for every command in the batch: >> >> 1. an update count >> 2. Statement.SUCCESS_NO_INFO to indicate that the command executed >> successfully but the number of rows affected is unknown >> 3. Statement.EXECUTE_FAILED to indicate that the command failed to >> execute successfully >> >> >> I do not know if the Postgres "driver continues to process commands >> after an error" but if it does then the array should contain 10 entries >> and one would have the "Statement.EXECUTE_FAILED". >> >> Tomorrow, I'll dig a bit deeper if nobody else can explain this. >> >> HTH, >> Rob >
В списке pgsql-jdbc по дате отправления: