I'm getting different results from sasql_affected_rows() with sasql_query() vs sasql_stmt_execute() and I can't see what I'm doing wrong. (I use sasql_stmt_execute() because I use prepared statements.) After sasql_query, I get the proper number of rows, while after sasql_stmt_execute, the affected rows are always zero. Here's my test code: $cstring = "DSN=demo16;UID=DBA;PWD=sql"; $sql = "UPDATE Customers SET ID = ID;"; and the output is: sasql_query() UPDATE Customers SET ID = ID; sasql_affected_rows()=126 sasql_stmt_execute() UPDATE Customers SET ID = ID; sasql_affected_rows()=0 Has anyone else seen this? |
The function you need to use for the sasql_stmt_execute() case is a different one
http://dcx.sybase.com/index.html#sa160/en/dbprogramming/php-stmt-affected-rows.html Calling sasql_affected_rows() is picking up the result set from the connection object and thus the last query. Hopefully this will make this a little clearer. Nick, thanks a lot for looking into this - big help! I should have been able to see that :-(
(01 Dec '14, 17:18)
Terry Wilkinson
|
Maybe I missed something important but the operation
by definition makes no changes. In SQL anywhere that will always affect 0 rows, and will not even get logged. The difference here is that the sasql_stmt_execute() execution only performs the update (thus rowcount==0) where as the sasql_affected_rows() execution returns the result set of candidate rows (thus a rowcount >0). This difference is because of a new feature introduced in version 12.0 documented as "Support for selecting from DML statements" . Look to the 3rd from last item near the bottom. Thanks for the answer, Nick - however, I probably used too simple an example. In my real use-case, the update does in fact change some column values, but I still get sasql_affected_rows() returning 0; Also, if it really has something to do with ID not changing in my example above, why does get sasql_affected_rows() return 126 after sasql_query() in test1, but 0 after sasql_stmt_execute() in test2?
(04 Nov '14, 13:13)
Terry Wilkinson
Here's a better example: change the above query to: UPDATE SalesOrderItems SET Quantity = Quantity + 1; It gives the results: sasql_query() UPDATE SalesOrderItems SET Quantity = Quantity + 1; sasql_affected_rows()=1097 sasql_stmt_execute() UPDATE SalesOrderItems SET Quantity = Quantity + 1; sasql_affected_rows()=0 1097 for sasql_query() and 0 for sasql_stmt_execute().
(04 Nov '14, 15:06)
Terry Wilkinson
It looks like I (or someone else) will need to take a closer/deeper look at this ...
(05 Nov '14, 10:51)
Nick Elson S...
|