freetds AT lists.ibiblio.org
Subject: FreeTDS Development Group
List archive
- From: ZIGLIO Frediano <Frediano.Ziglio AT vodafoneomnitel.it>
- To: "'TDS Development Group'" <freetds AT franklin.metalab.unc.edu>
- Subject: Re: g__numeric_bytes_per_precison
- Date: Mon, 2 Sep 2002 18:13:57 +0200
>
> Aah,
>
> it occurs to that this may be why Jim's "conversion status"
> report (using
> convert_acid) reports that numeric conversions are broken for
> TDS 5.0 ?
>
> does that make sense ?
>
TDS5??
Should be the unique that work :)
FreeTDS use Sybase coding...
I'll do some more test (I already test tds_convert for numeric, not for
wire)...
> I remember someone raising the (quite valid) objection that
> you could call
> dbconvert etc. when not logged in to a database and that therefore my
> method of allocating g__numeric_bytes_per_precision on receipt of the
> login ack was flawed. perhaps we should reinstate the dynamic
> initialisation of this array, but also keep the defaulted
> values for this
> eventuality.
>
No, I don't think so...
Note: this array tell how many bytes are needed to store a precision while
TDS8 one is only the bytes that pass on wire... is completely a different
meaning. Also for TDS8 numeric should only be zero padded to obtain number.
> BTW, I think I have found a way to resolve the "long long"
> controversy for
> money values, allowing us to revert to the definition of
> TDS_MONEY as two
> 4 byte integers. I'll keep you posted once I have finished testing...
>
Good !!
freddy77
=================================
"STRICTLY PERSONAL AND CONFIDENTIAL
This message may contain confidential and proprietary material for the sole
use of the intended recipient. Any review or distribution by others is
strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient please contact
the sender and delete all copies.
The contents of this message that do not relate to the official business of
our company shall be understood as neither given nor endorsed by it."
=================================
-
g__numeric_bytes_per_precison,
Bill Thompson, 09/02/2002
- <Possible follow-up(s)>
- RE: g__numeric_bytes_per_precison, ZIGLIO Frediano, 09/02/2002
- Re: g__numeric_bytes_per_precison, Bill Thompson, 09/02/2002
- RE: g__numeric_bytes_per_precison, ZIGLIO Frediano, 09/02/2002
- Re: g__numeric_bytes_per_precison, ZIGLIO Frediano, 09/02/2002
- RE: g__numeric_bytes_per_precison, Thompson, Bill D (London), 09/02/2002
- Re: g__numeric_bytes_per_precison, James K . Lowden, 09/02/2002
Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.