FreeTDS Development Group

["ZIGLIO, Frediano, VF-IT" <Frediano.Ziglio AT vodafone.com>]

> 
> ZIGLIO, Frediano, VF-IT wrote:
> > 
> > BUF_FULL is returned if buffering is turned on and reading 
> the next row
> > would cause the buffer to be exceeded. In this case, no row 
> will have
> > been read. To read any more rows, at least one row must 
> first be pruned
> > from the top of the row buffer by calling dbclrbuf.
> > 
> > so BUF_FULL is not returned if buffer is already full but 
> only if buffer
> > will be full
> 
> How does FreeTDS differ from Microsoft's behavior?  
> 
> As I read the specification, "would ... be exceeded" means 
> "is full".  If
> the buffer holds 3 rows, dbnextrow() returns BUF_FULL when 
> trying to read
> the 4th row.  
> 
> To me, dbnextrow() is correct: it checks to see if there is 
> room in the
> buffer.  If not, it returns BUF_FULL without reading a row.  
> 
> (I'm hoping to fix dbnextrow() and dbresults() today to remove
> dbproc->dbresults_state.)
> 

Is strange but it seems that if you set buffer to 10 rows after getting
9 rows dbnextrow returns BUF_FULL. Obviously there is space for another
row but it returns BUF_FULL (and it doesn't seem to read the row...).

freddy77