Level Extreme platform
Subscription
Corporate profile
Products & Services
Support
Legal
Français
No. of attributes is larger than no. of attribute values
Message
From
03/08/2022 05:19:50
 
General information
Forum:
Visual FoxPro
Category:
Databases,Tables, Views, Indexing and SQL syntax
Miscellaneous
Thread ID:
01684739
Message ID:
01684766
Views:
27
Hi Martina,

Already did the changes. It is part of my base class so it is easy on my part.

Also, I think we should really change it since using option=13684 (BIGINT) from MySQL will only convert it to VFP integer data, which we know has a limit.

At least, using option=536870912 gives us the real values; we only need to convert using VAL().

However, my problem still remains:
ERROR [01000] [MySQL][ODBC 8.0(w) Driver][mysqld-8.0.29]The number of attributes is larger than the number of attribute values provided
I shall go back to using MySQL ODBC 8.0.30 and Server 5.7.39 for now.

Regards
Dennis


>Hi Dennis,
>
>Not is good way, becase you must rewrite your application, if you got datatype char instead number.
>
>IMHO, safety is using older ODBC driver.
>
>MartinaJ
>
>>Hi Martina,
>>
>>I changed option=13684 (Treat BIGINT columns as INT columns) to option=536870912 (Bind BIGINT parameters as strings).
>>
>>select 4000000000 yielded "4000000000 " -> a 20 character string.
>>
>>So I guess option=536870912 is way better?
>>
>>Dennis
>>
>>
>>>Hi Denis,
>>>
>>>ODBC driver converts number 4000000000 to -294967296?
>>>
>>>Hmm,
>>>
>>>
>>>?CAST(4000000000 as int) && return -294967296
>>>
>>>
>>>IMHO, the ODBC driver got 4000000000 as bigint, but VFP don't know bigint datatype and convert to signed int.
>>>Question is why ODBC driver ignore NO_BIGINT flag?
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>select CAST(4000000000 AS DECIMAL(20))
>>>-- select CAST(4000000000 AS INTEGER) -- converts to bigint - by documentation
>>>
>>>
>>>MartinaJ
>>>
>>>>Hi Martina,
>>>>
>>>>I tried the different select's you told me to do:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>select 1
>>>>select 10
>>>>select 10000
>>>>select 4000000000
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>The first 3 yielded the same numbers, except for 4000000000, which yielded -294967296 !!!
>>>>
>>>>Why is this so? Pardon my ignorance.
>>>>
>>>>Regards
>>>>Dennis
Previous
Next
Reply
Map
View

Click here to load this message in the networking platform