Affected rows count is inconsistent with other database drivers

[Grauenwolf]

I'm working on an ORM. And one of the things it does is check the affected rows count after performing an update using ExecuteAsNonQuery(). If the count isn't 1, it throws an error saying the row couldn't be found.

Currently I've tested this design with

• SQL Sever (SqlClient and OleDB)
• PostgreSQL (Npgsql)
• SQLite (System.Data.SQLite and SQLitePCLRaw)
• Access (OleDB)
• MySQL (MySqlConnector and Oracle's driver)

So far MySqlConnector is the only one that doesn't return 1 when the record was found, but no changes were made.

---

If I add "UseAffectedRows=false" to the connection string, it will work. But this means modifying the connection string I'm given, which would be weird from the user's perspective.

I don't know what the right answer if for MySqlConnector, but I felt that I should bring the inconsistency to your attention.

[caleblloyd]

Pomelo EF Core modifies the connection string to work around this very issue.

https://github.com/PomeloFoundation/Pomelo.EntityFrameworkCore.MySql/blob/master/src/EFCore.MySql/Extensions/MySqlDbContextOptionsExtensions.cs#L29-L30

History for the reason it is defaulted to true in the driver is in issue #104

[Grauenwolf]

Well if they're not the only one doing it, I don't feel so bad.

[Grauenwolf]

Is there a way to determine from the MySQLConnection object which mode you are in?

Or better yet, a way to override the behavior of a particular MySqlCommand object for the duration of a single query?

[bgrainger]

Is there a way to determine from the MySQLConnection object which mode you are in?

No, but an API could be added for this. Edit (see below): The MySqlConnection.ConnectionString property can be parsed with MySqlConnectionStringBuilder to determine what the setting is.

Or better yet, a way to override the behavior of a particular MySqlCommand object for the duration of a single query?

No, this is not possible, because the flag is set in the initial handshake with the server and can't be changed for the lifetime of the connection.

[bgrainger]

The behaviour of the MySQL engine itself appears to be by design:

For UPDATE statements, the affected-rows value by default is the number of rows actually changed.

I'm a little surprised to hear that all other database engines count a "no-op update" as an affected row.

[caleblloyd]

Is there a way to determine from the MySQLConnection object which mode you are in?

Further down in the Pomelo file it does this by parsing the connection string associated with the connection. If the connection has not been opened yet then it modifies the connection string associated with the connection.

https://github.com/PomeloFoundation/Pomelo.EntityFrameworkCore.MySql/blob/master/src/EFCore.MySql/Extensions/MySqlDbContextOptionsExtensions.cs#L50-L67

[Grauenwolf]

I'm a little surprised to hear that all other database engines count a "no-op update" as an affected row.

That's how SQL Server works. And since it was the first ADO.NET database driver, I bet everyone else just followed the same pattern.

Further down in the Pomelo file it does this by parsing the connection string associated with the connection.

That's not a perfect solution for me, but it will cover most of my use cases so I'm ok with closing this ticket if no one objects.

[bgrainger]

The primary reasons for defaulting to UseAffectedRows=true were described here: #104 (comment)

I was also trying to follow the [ExecuteNonQuery documentation](https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/dotnet/api/system.data.common.dbcommand.executenonquery?view=netframework-4.7.2 which says it returns "The number of rows affected."

However, "affected" in that documentation could either be interpreted strictly (as MySQL Server does, i.e., rows that are changed to different values), or loosely (as all other databases do, i.e., rows that are matched by the WHERE clause and are candidates for being updated). It doesn't strongly imply the MySQL interpretation.

Since making that decision, we've learnt:

• Pomelo has to work around the default.
• @Grauenwolf's ORM would have to work around the default.
• Multiple issues (Issue on rowcount through ExecuteNonQuery() under Transaction #403, Cannot add or update a child row: a foreign key constaint fails #552) have been filed by people not expecting this behaviour change when switching client libraries.

It seems like UseAffectedRows=false may be the better default for compatibility both with MySql.Data and other ADO.NET libraries.

This is obviously a breaking change (users would have to review any ExecuteNonQuery of an UPDATE to make sure the return value is used correctly, or just change all their connection strings), but better to do it sooner rather than later (e.g., after 1.0).

@caleblloyd you helped picked the default; any thoughts on this change?

[bgrainger]

I added a test (to AdoNetApiTest) to check the return value of ExecuteNonQuery for UPDATE: mysql-net/AdoNetApiTest@eae7f1a

Only MySqlConnector and dotConnect failed:

This reinforces the suggestion that it would be best to match the behaviour of other ADO.NET libraries.

[caleblloyd]

It's a tough call. UseAffectedRows=true is in line with most other language's MySQL drivers when I researched them in #104 (comment)

UseAffectedRows=false is in line with other ADO.NET imolementations. I am curious, do the other DBMS' have the notion of Found vs. Affected rows?

[bgrainger]

Compatibility with other languages' drivers' defaults is (much) less important to me. The scenarios I'm more concerned about are:

• Migrate from Connector/NET to MySqlConnector: currently different, would be identical behaviour with this change
• Change from SQL Server (w/ SqlClient) to MySQL (w/ MySqlConnector): ExecuteNonQuery currently returns different values, but would return the same values with this change
• Upgrade from MySqlConnector 0.48.2 to vNext: breaking change, but how big an impact is it?

[bgrainger]

I am curious, do the other DBMS' have the notion of Found vs. Affected rows?

It appears to be unique to MySQL AFAICT.

• Oracle: https://dba.stackexchange.com/questions/126233/how-to-find-the-number-of-rows-changed-by-an-update-statement-in-oracle
• SQL Server: https://stackoverflow.com/a/36406023
• Postgres: https://dba.stackexchange.com/a/118214

Most people seem to recommend changing the query to UPDATE table SET col = newVal WHERE (other conditions) AND col <> newVal if you need to find the number of rows that are actually changed to a new value.

This workaround lets you get either "found rows" (default) or "affected rows" (add the extra predicate) behaviour with UseAffectedRows=false, i.e., you can switch on a query-by-query (instead of connection-by-connection) basis (assuming the UPDATE query can be modified in that way).

[caleblloyd]

Changing it to UseAffectedRows=false seems like a good idea then, to improve ADO.NET and MySQL.Data compatibility.