Re: Potential inconsistency in handling of timestamps

[Oliver Jowett <oliver(at)opencloud(dot)com>]

Kris Jurka wrote:
> On Fri, 26 Oct 2007, Oliver Jowett wrote:
>
> > > Null values should in theory get handled and returned well before 
> > > TimestampUtils ever gets invoked (see 
> > > AbstractJdbc2ResultSet.getTimestamp()). Can you supply a testcase 
> > > demonstrating the problem?
> >
> > Actually, it looks like this was fixed in AbstractJdbc2ResultSet r1.95 
> > (I was looking at CVS HEAD) but not on the 8.2 branch.
>
> I don't follow.  The commit you mention was unify the handling of the 
> RS.wasNull flag, not changing the handling of null values.  That should 
> be caught in TimestampUtils.toTimestamp and friends.

Well, it did change getTimestamp() so it returns null sooner:

http://gborg.postgresql.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/pgjdbc/org/postgresql/jdbc2/AbstractJdbc2ResultSet.java.diff?r1=1.94;r2=1.95;cvsroot=pgjdbc

@@ -419,7 +425,9 @@ public abstract class AbstractJdbc2Resul

     public Timestamp getTimestamp(int i, java.util.Calendar cal) 
throws SQLException
     {
-        this.checkResultSet(i);
+        checkResultSet(i);
+        if (wasNullFlag)
+            return null;

         if (cal != null)
             cal = (Calendar)cal.clone();

You're right though, null should be caught by 
TimestampUtils.toTimestamp() too.

Back to looking for a testcase?

-O