On 2016-12-27 09:45, John Fawcett wrote:
On 12/26/2016 10:35 PM, Wietse Venema wrote:
John Fawcett:
so long as the loop continues in the presence of a zero return
code from mysql_next_result() and mysql_store_result is called for
each one we will stay in sync. With the break above we will be ok,
since the loop stops only when there are no more results -1 normal
condition from mysql_next_result or >0 error condition from
mysql_next_result via the break.
I further reduced the number of state variables, moved the "no
result" check out of the loop, included the database name in warning
messages, and added support for "require_result_set = no" to avoid
the need for dummy SELECT statements in stored procedures.
Please check out postfix-3.2-20161226-nonprod. As you will see,
code diffs not useful at this point.
Wietse
Thanks. I ran it through my tests and it produces expected results for
queries and stored procedures. I'll run it for a while (using queries)
and report back any issues.
John
I wan't to thank you guys for integrating stored procedure support into
postfix. The amount of thought put into this relatively minor task was
impressive to me, but I suppose that is the reason why postfix is
considered such a safe and stable system. I guess this mentality is what
enabled postfix to compete and grow alongside other MTAs over the last
two decades.
I use the latest evolution of the mysql code in my production system,
including the "require_result_set=no" flag and it performs flawlessly.
My primarily email volume consists of my private mail but I forward
emails for an association, hence the complex setup....
Thanks again,
Joel
