FreeTDS Development Group

["NamoAmituofo" <shian AT kmspks.org>]

unsubscribe quote AT thedailyenlightenment.com

WithPalmsTogether _/|\_ Amituofo.shian

----- Original Message -----

From: "ZIGLIO Frediano" <Frediano.Ziglio AT vodafoneomnitel.it>

To: <freetds AT lists.ibiblio.org>

Sent: Tuesday, November 26, 2002 4:36 PM

Subject: RE: [freetds] rpc better: now only broken

> > 
> > James,
> > 
> > marker 253 is, 
as Freddy says, just the 0xfd END token.
> > 
> > Once again, 
I've reproduced the problem, and I think we're making
> > significant 
progress.
> > From the dump, I see we're getting back a meaningful 
response 
> > at least...
> > 
> > 2002-11-26 
15:12:57.669289 calling dbrpcsend
> > Sending packet @ 2002-11-26 
15:12:57.670453
> > 0000  03 01 00 1f 00 00 01 00  06 00 23 
00 74 00 30 00   
> > |........ ..#.t.0.|
> > 
0010  30 00 32 00 32 00 00 00  00 00 26 de ad be 
ef      
> > |0.2.2... ..&....|
> 
> 
> > 
> > 2002-11-26 15:12:57.671224 calling 
dbsqlok
> > 2002-11-26 15:12:57.671861 in dbsqlok()
> > 
Received header @ 2002-11-26 15:12:57.672428
> > 0000  04 01 00 11 
00 46 01 
00                            
|.....F..|
> > 
> > 
> > Received packet @ 2002-11-26 
15:12:57.672964
> > 0000  fd 02 00 00 00 00 00 00  
00                        
|........ .|
> > 
> > 
> > 2002-11-26 15:12:57.673473 
dbsqlok() marker is 253
> > 2002-11-26 15:12:57.674137 dbsqlok() found 
end token
> > 2002-11-26 15:12:57.674552 inside tds_process_end() 
more_results = 0,
> > was_cancelled = 0
> > 2002-11-26 
15:12:57.675009 dbsqlok() end status was error
> > 
> > We 
appear to have gotten back a valid "error" status in the 
> > done 
token.
> > That's the two byte integer "0x02 0x00" (in little endian) 
> > following the
> > "0xfd"
> > 
> > No 
accompanying error message though. Hmmmm. need to look at 
> > what 
we're
> > sending I guess.
> > I'll have a look at that packet 
we send in a bit more detail...
> > 
> > Bill
> > 
> 
> This patch solve RPC problem but open other possible 
problems... 
> - dynamic do not want column names on data
> - we do 
not use column_namelen (is this correct?)
> - correct to use column_flags? 
Perhaps flags are different in TDS7/TDS5?
> 
> 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."
> 
> =================================
> 
  
> 
>