Hello everyone,
In order to migrate to Firebird 2.5, I decided to test Zeos 7.0.0 again
My application uses SQLite and Firebird. I noticed that a blob field in my table in SQLite was not correctly read, while the same field, from the same table, but in Firebird (with the same structure and data), was accessed correctly.
Investigating the problem, I noticed that when the field immediately prior to the Blob field is null, the contents of the Blob is despised ...
Debugging the source code, I noticed that in some Units within "dbc" directory, when the Blob contents is readed, the internal variable "LastWasNull" is not being set ... so this cause the problem ...
The patch attached contains modifications to some Units on DBC, adjusting the content of "LastWasNull" on "GetBlob"
Please consider whether the changes are correct, and if it can be integrated with SVN sources
Thanks
Patch to fix problems on SQLite Blob Fields
Moderators: gto, EgonHugeist, olehs
-
- Fresh Boarder
- Posts: 7
- Joined: 12.09.2009, 16:37
Patch to fix problems on SQLite Blob Fields
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
-
- Fresh Boarder
- Posts: 7
- Joined: 12.09.2009, 16:37
- mdaems
- Zeos Project Manager
- Posts: 2766
- Joined: 20.09.2005, 15:28
- Location: Brussels, Belgium
- Contact:
dopidaniel,
Yes, the patch will be merged to trunk at the next merge operation. Which means after at least a week and then when time permits...
Afterwards the patch will also be merged into the 6.6-patches branch (maintenance releases).
Meanwhile you can find the already patched version on svn://zeos.firmos.at/zeos/branches/testing , but this branch should be considered experimental.
Mark
Yes, the patch will be merged to trunk at the next merge operation. Which means after at least a week and then when time permits...
Afterwards the patch will also be merged into the 6.6-patches branch (maintenance releases).
Meanwhile you can find the already patched version on svn://zeos.firmos.at/zeos/branches/testing , but this branch should be considered experimental.
Mark