From: | Richard Broersma <richard(dot)broersma(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | pgsql-odbc <pgsql-odbc(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: UPDATE statement value mutation |
Date: | 2010-07-06 18:24:55 |
Message-ID: | AANLkTilG7bdKKMnRX_uEqUHEP0OTwmepD2mF2l_aZXWm@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-odbc |
I stripped the .bmp attachment since it seems emails with attachments
aren't distributed.
On Mon, Jul 5, 2010 at 3:24 PM, Richard Broersma
<richard(dot)broersma(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> Notice the attached bitmap image. I'm trying to change a value from
> my MS-Access front-end from 0 to 99 using an update-able query.
> However, when the actual update statement reaches PostgreSQL the value
> of 99 is some how changed to 11. Is this a bug in Access or the ODBC
> driver?
>
>
>
> Postgresql Version:
> version
> -------------------------------------------------------------
> PostgreSQL 8.4.4, compiled by Visual C++ build 1400, 32-bit
>
>
> ODBC driver version:
> ------------------------------
> [0.002]Driver Version='08.04.0200,200912260001' linking 1500 static
> Multithread library
> [0.003]Global Options: fetch=100, socket=4096, unknown_sizes=0,
> max_varchar_size=255, max_longvarchar_size=8190
> [0.003] disable_optimizer=0, ksqo=1, unique_index=1,
> use_declarefetch=0
> [0.004] text_as_longvarchar=1,
> unknowns_as_longvarchar=0, bools_as_char=1 NAMEDATALEN=64
> [0.005] extra_systable_prefixes='dd_', conn_settings=''
> conn_encoding=''
> [0.087] [ PostgreSQL version string = '8.4.4' ]
> [0.087] [ PostgreSQL version number = '8.4' ]
> [0.090]conn=088A4008, query='select oid, typbasetype from pg_type
> where typname = 'lo''
> [0.099] [ fetched 0 rows ]
> [0.101] [ Large Object oid = -999 ]
> [0.102] [ Client encoding = 'UTF8' (code = 6) ]
>
>
> MS-Access 2002 (10.6771.6858) SP3
>
>
> Here is the statement that reaches Postgresql.
>
> 2010-07-05 15:21:26 PDTLOG: statement: BEGIN;UPDATE
> "public"."drawings" SET "drawing_type"=11 WHERE "drawingnbr" =
> E'E-4400-60429D-S1' AND "xmin" = 23018
> 2010-07-05 15:21:26 PDTERROR: insert or update on table "drawings"
> violates foreign key constraint "drawings_drawing_type_fkey"
> 2010-07-05 15:21:26 PDTDETAIL: Key (drawing_type)=(11) is not present
> in table "drawing_types".
> 2010-07-05 15:21:26 PDTSTATEMENT: BEGIN;UPDATE "public"."drawings"
> SET "drawing_type"=11 WHERE "drawingnbr" = E'E-4400-60429D-S1' AND
> "xmin" = 23018
> 2010-07-05 15:21:26 PDTLOG: statement: ROLLBACK
>
> --
> Regards,
> Richard Broersma Jr.
>
> Visit the Los Angeles PostgreSQL Users Group (LAPUG)
> http://pugs.postgresql.org/lapug
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Arnaud Lesauvage | 2010-07-07 06:47:52 | Re: 'default nextval()' loses schema-qualification in dump ? |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2010-07-06 15:17:38 | Re: 'default nextval()' loses schema-qualification in dump ? |