Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Jump to bottom

Different ComStmtPrepare process between MySQL Connector/J and MySQL C API #4355

Closed
tuohai666 opened this issue Feb 18, 2020 · 0 comments
Closed

Different ComStmtPrepare process between MySQL Connector/J and MySQL C API #4355

tuohai666 opened this issue Feb 18, 2020 · 0 comments
Assignees
@tuohai666
Labels
in: document in: proxy
Milestone
4.1.0

Comments

@tuohai666
Copy link
Member

Column type of char in response of ComStmtPrepare handled differently between MySQL Connector/J and MySQL C API.
Connector/J accepts MYSQL_TYPE_VARCHAR, MYSQL_TYPE_VAR_STRING and MYSQL_TYPE_STRING.
While C API checks strictly and only accept MYSQL_TYPE_VAR_STRING and MYSQL_TYPE_STRING, because column type will be stored in struct MYSQL_STMT (fields.type) but MYSQL_TYPE_VARCHAR is not allowed to bind result.
@tuohai666 tuohai666 added this to the 5.0.0 milestone Feb 18, 2020
@tuohai666 tuohai666 self-assigned this Feb 18, 2020
terrymanu pushed a commit that referenced this issue Feb 18, 2020
@tuohai666
#4255, use CAPI in stmt mode return incorrect response (#4353)
00f0db6 
* #4255, use CAPI in stmt mode ,mysql_stmt_prepare and mysql_stmt_execute return incorrect response

* #4255, refine

* #4255, for checkstyle

* #4255, add reference #4355 for Column Types

* #4255, add reference #4358 for Parameter Types

* #4255, for comments
@terrymanu terrymanu modified the milestones: 5.0.0, 4.1.0 Mar 18, 2020
@tuohai666 tuohai666 mentioned this issue Apr 27, 2020
Closed
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Assignees

@tuohai666 tuohai666

Labels
in: document in: proxy
Projects
None yet
Milestone
4.1.0
Development

No branches or pull requests
2 participants
@terrymanu @tuohai666