From aerd@retemail.es Mon Oct  9 23:59:32 2000
Received: from hub.org.org (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by hub.org (8.10.1/8.10.1) with SMTP id e99NxWJ63629
	for <pgsql-interfaces@hub.org>; Mon, 9 Oct 2000 19:59:32 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from smtp5s.retemail.es (smtp5s.iddeo.es [62.81.31.74])
	by hub.org (8.10.1/8.10.1) with ESMTP id e95HCw793216
	for <pgsql-interfaces@postgresql.org>;
	Thu, 5 Oct 2000 13:12:58 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from celeron ([62.174.96.94]) by smtp5s.retemail.es
	(InterMail v4.01.01.00 201-229-111) with SMTP
	id <20001005171524.PKUR25271.smtp5s@celeron>
	for <pgsql-interfaces@postgresql.org>; Thu, 5 Oct 2000 19:15:24 +0200
Message-ID: <00cf01c02ef0$4fb0cef0$0d00dcc0@celeron>
From: "Erny" <aerd@retemail.es>
To: <pgsql-interfaces@postgresql.org>
Subject: Driver or Postgres doesn't report refer. integr. errors
Date: Thu, 5 Oct 2000 19:18:21 +0200
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_00CB_01C02F01.065C9F20"
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2919.6700
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2919.6700
X-Archive-Number: 200010/53
X-Sequence-Number: 1410

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_00CB_01C02F01.065C9F20
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Hi,

I'm running 7.0 on NT (with cygwin) and ODBC 6.50

I picked up the pgupt.mdb (0.15) to upsize from Access 97.

I changed it to use ON UPDATE, ON DELETE ... in the Create statements, disc=
arding all the other trigger creations. I'm still early in development, so =
I still have not many ideas on the interaction with the drivers.

The good news is that all my database with a lot of tables just convert cor=
rectly to 7.0 (including the whole referential integrity) and default value=
s. Perhaps I will publish soon all the modifications I did on pgupt.mdb

After that, I linked all the tables in Access 97 (fast and easy).

The bad news, whenever I delete or update  a record causing error in refere=
ntial integrity, no error is reported to Access. The record seems to disapp=
ear, but when rereading the table (or recordset), the 'deleted' record reap=
pears.

(please send cc to me: aerd@mx3.redestb.es )
Thanx in advance,
Erny




------=_NextPart_000_00CB_01C02F01.065C9F20
Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META content=3D"text/html; charset=3Diso-8859-1" http-equiv=3DContent-Type>
<META content=3D"MSHTML 5.00.2920.0" name=3DGENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Hi,</FONT></DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>I'm running 7.0 on NT (with cygwin) and OD=
BC=20
6.50</FONT></DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>I picked up the pgupt.mdb (0.15) to upsize=
 from=20
Access 97.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>I changed it to use ON UPDATE, ON DELETE .=
.. in the=20
Create statements, discarding all the other trigger creations. I'm still ea=
rly=20
in development, so I still have not many ideas on the interaction with the=
=20
drivers.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>The good news is that all my database with=
 a lot of=20
tables just convert correctly to 7.0 (including the whole referential integ=
rity)=20
and default values. Perhaps I will publish soon all the modifications I did=
 on=20
pgupt.mdb</FONT></DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>After that, I linked all the tables in Acc=
ess 97=20
(fast and easy).</FONT></DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>The bad news, whenever I delete or update =
 a record=20
causing error in referential integrity, no error is reported to Access. The=
=20
record seems to disappear, but when rereading the table (or recordset), the=
=20
'deleted' record reappears.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>(please send cc to me: <A=20
href=3D"mailto:aerd@mx3.redestb.es">aerd@mx3.redestb.es</A> )</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Thanx in advance,</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Erny</FONT></DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV></BODY></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_00CB_01C02F01.065C9F20--




From fjoe@iclub.nsu.ru Tue Oct  10 08:56:49 2000
Received: from iclub.nsu.ru (root@iclub.nsu.ru [193.124.222.66])
	by hub.org (8.10.1/8.10.1) with ESMTP id e9A8umJ89818
	for <pgsql-interfaces@postgresql.org>;
	Tue, 10 Oct 2000 04:56:49 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from localhost (fjoe@localhost)
	by iclub.nsu.ru (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id PAA40955;
	Tue, 10 Oct 2000 15:56:16 +0700 (NSS)
	(envelope-from fjoe@iclub.nsu.ru)
Date: Tue, 10 Oct 2000 15:56:16 +0700 (NSS)
From: Max Khon <fjoe@iclub.nsu.ru>
To: Cedar Cox <cedarc@visionforisrael.com>
cc: Erny <aerd@retemail.es>, pgsql-interfaces@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: Driver or Postgres doesn't report refer. integr.
 errors
In-Reply-To: 
 <Pine.LNX.4.21.0010101108030.24417-100000@nanu.visionforisrael.com>
Message-ID: <Pine.BSF.4.21.0010101548360.39921-100000@iclub.nsu.ru>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
X-Archive-Number: 200010/62
X-Sequence-Number: 1419

hi, there!

On Tue, 10 Oct 2000, Cedar Cox wrote:

> > The bad news, whenever I delete or update  a record causing error in referential integrity, no error is reported to Access. The record seems to disappear, but when rereading the table (or recordset), the 'deleted' record reappears.
> 
> Yes, this is a known problem with the current ODBC driver.  There are
> patches that fix this.  
> 
> Who's in charge of the ODBC driver?  Patches are fine, but I'm sure there
> are many of us that cannot compile under windows, myself included.  When
> can we get RI violation reporting included in the 'real' ODBC driver?  I
> don't like to rely on a special 'hacked' version of something in a
> production environment.

by the way -- backend protocol does not return numeric error codes
so ODBC driver cannot set SQLCODE's. (SQLCODE returned by ODBC driver is
always empty). So applications that use ODBC can not distinguish
for example, referential integrity errors from backend fatal errors or
errors in SQL statement. Of course, it is possible to examine
string error messages which are returned by backend by this is rather
hackish and there is no evidence that they will not change in future.

/fjoe




From cedarc@visionforisrael.com Tue Oct  10 08:17:02 2000
Received: from alpha.netvision.net.il (alpha.netvision.net.il [194.90.1.13])
	by hub.org (8.10.1/8.10.1) with ESMTP id e9A8H1J78446
	for <pgsql-interfaces@postgresql.org>;
	Tue, 10 Oct 2000 04:17:02 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from nanu.visionforisrael.com (ras9-p131.jlm.netvision.net.il
	[62.0.166.131])
	by alpha.netvision.net.il (8.9.3/8.8.6) with ESMTP id KAA09550;
	Tue, 10 Oct 2000 10:16:59 +0200 (IST)
Received: from localhost (cedarc@localhost)
	by nanu.visionforisrael.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id LAA24441;
	Tue, 10 Oct 2000 11:14:08 +0200
Date: Tue, 10 Oct 2000 11:14:07 +0200 (IST)
From: Cedar Cox <cedarc@visionforisrael.com>
To: Erny <aerd@retemail.es>
cc: pgsql-interfaces@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: Driver or Postgres doesn't report refer. integr.
 errors
In-Reply-To: <00cf01c02ef0$4fb0cef0$0d00dcc0@celeron>
Message-ID: 
 <Pine.LNX.4.21.0010101108030.24417-100000@nanu.visionforisrael.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
X-Archive-Number: 200010/61
X-Sequence-Number: 1418


> The bad news, whenever I delete or update  a record causing error in referential integrity, no error is reported to Access. The record seems to disappear, but when rereading the table (or recordset), the 'deleted' record reappears.

Yes, this is a known problem with the current ODBC driver.  There are
patches that fix this.  

Who's in charge of the ODBC driver?  Patches are fine, but I'm sure there
are many of us that cannot compile under windows, myself included.  When
can we get RI violation reporting included in the 'real' ODBC driver?  I
don't like to rely on a special 'hacked' version of something in a
production environment.

Thanks

-Cedar