On Mon, 27 Mar 2017, Gary Doades wrote:
>> The problem therefore lies in either the Pascal layer on top of the native
>> client libs or in the way the client libs themselves work :( I suspect the
>> latter.
> As far as I know, the DB-Specific pascal layer does not buffer anything, it
> just f
On Mon, 27 Mar 2017, Gary Doades wrote:
Indeed, that's why I can't currently see where the problem lies. It
shouldn't buffer the rows/records, but it does... or at least
something does and I'm pretty sure it's not my program.
The DB-client library maybe?
Yup!
I was running some other te
>
>> Indeed, that's why I can't currently see where the problem lies. It
>> shouldn't buffer the rows/records, but it does... or at least
>> something does and I'm pretty sure it's not my program.
> The DB-client library maybe?
Yup!
I was running some other tests and copied the table contents
On Monday 27 March 2017 10:20:20 Gary Doades wrote:
> >> It may be that UniDirectional is meant to not buffer all rows, but at
> >> the moment it certainly seems to.
> >
> > Strange, looking at source code it seems to me, that buffering should not
> > happen. As far as TUniDirectionalBufIndex shoul
It may be that UniDirectional is meant to not buffer all rows, but at the
moment it certainly seems to.
Strange, looking at source code it seems to me, that buffering should not
happen.
As far as TUniDirectionalBufIndex should be used and his AddRecord method does
not allocate new memory.
I
>
>> It may be that UniDirectional is meant to not buffer all rows, but at the
>> moment it certainly seems to.
> Strange, looking at source code it seems to me, that buffering should not
> happen.
> As far as TUniDirectionalBufIndex should be used and his AddRecord method
> does not allocate n
It may be that UniDirectional is meant to not buffer all rows, but at the
moment it certainly seems to.
Strange, looking at source code it seems to me, that buffering should
not happen.
As far as TUniDirectionalBufIndex should be used and his AddRecord
method does not allocate new memory.
> From your original message one could think that you were using
> PacketRecords:=-1 which means fetch all records at once, but if you are using
> the standard setting, which is 10 and yet it is still fetching everything at
> once, it
> sounds like a bug to me.
As far as I can tell setting Uni
