[ic] Matrix options and set_row possible bug?

Peter peter at pajamian.dhs.org
Thu Jun 22 18:02:17 EDT 2006

On 06/22/2006 02:53 PM, Jon Jensen wrote:
> On Thu, 22 Jun 2006, Peter wrote:
>> I may see if I can fix both because the first mentioned bug would pay 
>> to help everyone out if I can fix it.  I think it's branching wrong in 
>> set_row (from looking it should be branching to a different part of 
>> the function if only the key is defined, but it's not) so I'll see if 
>> I can figure out why.  I've got a change in mond of using DEFAULT 
>> instead of the '?' placeholder for fields that don't exist in the 
>> @fields array, that may go a long ways towards fising it, but it would 
>> also require changing the number of bindings or the db will error out 
>> because of a mismatch of bindings to ?'s.
> I'd like to see a fix for this key-only problem if you fix it.
> If you hack in support for DEFAULT, make sure to use the database 
> capability system, since DEFAULT isn't supported by lots of databases.

Oh, I was under the impression that DEFAULT was part of SQL99.  In that 
case I can just name fields and omit the placholders for the rest, that 
should be compatible across the board (correct me again if I'm wrong).

> You may also want to consider using the new $DBDPG_DEFAULT variable and 
> keeping the placeholders, instead of writing custom SQL. Recent versions 
> of DBD::Pg support this variable, which Greg Sabino Mullane (DBD::Pg 
> maintainer) explained here:

That sounds interesting,b ut I'd like to keep compatibility with older 
DBD::Pg's and especially with other databases since this is something I 
intend to submit back to the community.


More information about the interchange-users mailing list