Skip to main content

[jpa-spec users] [jsr338-experts] Re: StoredProcedure clarification

  • From: Steve Ebersole <steve.ebersole@...>
  • To: jsr338-experts@...
  • Subject: [jpa-spec users] [jsr338-experts] Re: StoredProcedure clarification
  • Date: Fri, 26 Jul 2013 17:26:42 -0500
  • List-id: <jsr338-experts.jpa-spec.java.net>

Related:

EntityManager em = ...;
StoredProcedureQuery query = em.createStoredProcedureQuery(...);
query.getUpdateCount();
query.getUpdateCount();
query.getUpdateCount();
...

Even say it "does the right thing":
StoredProcedureQuery query = em.createStoredProcedureQuery(...);
query.execute();
query.getUpdateCount();
query.getUpdateCount();
query.getUpdateCount();

Javadoc for getUpdateCount says "Return the update count or -1 if there is no pending result or if the next result is not an update count."

The part that bothers me is the "next result" bit. To me that indicates that we are supposed to "move on" to the next result. But say the next logical result is a ResultSet. I guess I am not seeing the consistent way to cycle through the ResultSets/updateCounts if the TCK tests are how this is supposed to work. All these situations are exactly things done in the TCK.


On Fri 26 Jul 2013 05:16:44 PM CDT, Steve Ebersole wrote:
EntityManager em = ...;
StoredProcedureQuery query = em.createStoredProcedureQuery(...);
query.getUpdateCount();

What should happen above when getUpdateCount() is called?  The
"result" corollaries (getResultList, getSingleResult) specifically say
that the query will be executed when they are called. getUpdateCount
conspicuously says nothing on the subject.  Nor does it call out being
allowed to throw an exception in this case.  So should I assume that
getUpdateCount() should just return -1 here?

Yes, its a silly case, but the TCK does it.  Many times...




[jpa-spec users] [jsr338-experts] StoredProcedure clarification

Steve Ebersole 07/26/2013

[jpa-spec users] [jsr338-experts] Re: StoredProcedure clarification

Steve Ebersole 07/26/2013

[jpa-spec users] [jsr338-experts] Re: StoredProcedure clarification

Steve Ebersole 07/26/2013
 
 
Close
loading
Please Confirm
Close