Re: Visual FoxPro 9 ODBC errors

From: MargaretGillon(at)chromalloy(dot)com
To: "Alejandro D(dot) Burne" <alejandro(dot)dburne(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: MargaretGillon(at)chromalloy(dot)com, pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Visual FoxPro 9 ODBC errors
Date: 2006-01-04 17:23:19
Message-ID: OFAF5EF81D.8CE7EE69-ON882570EC.005C7F1B-882570EC.005EEAC1@CHROMALLOY.COM
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general

There is an ODBC problem with Visual Foxpro 9. According to a Visual
FoxPro maillist:

Since VFP caches a common statement handle that it reuses, it has to call
SQLFreeStmt(SQL_UNBIND) and SQLFreeStmt(SQL_RESET_PARAMS) to make sure the
cached statement handle is in a cleared state before reusing it. VFP
indeed calls these functions when all goes well, but when an error occurs
in SQLExecuteDirect it just calls SQLCancel and then returns from
SQLEXEC...... At least for me this is a bug in VFP, which is caused by the
fact that it caches a common statement handle but doesn't reset it
correctly when an error occurs.

A thread does exist for the problem on the pgsql-odbc list under
Subject: Re: [ODBC] Access violation C5 error on Visual FoxPro SQLEXEC()
call after error

*** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** ***
*** ***
Margaret Gillon, IS Dept., Chromalloy Los Angeles, ext. 297

This e-mail message and any attachment(s) are for the sole use of the
intended recipient(s) and may contain proprietary and/or confidential
information which may be privileged or otherwise protected from
disclosure. Any unauthorized review, use, disclosure or distribution is
prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient(s), please contact the
sender by reply email and destroy the original message and any copies of
the message as well as any attachment(s) to the original message.

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message marcelo Cortez 2006-01-04 18:25:19 copy from error
Previous Message Andrew - Supernews 2006-01-04 16:40:37 Re: When it is better to use "timestamp without time zone"?