You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to derby-dev@db.apache.org by Laura Stewart <sc...@gmail.com> on 2006/09/08 21:49:45 UTC
SQL State XJ080 "USING execute statement passed {0} parameters rather than {1}."
I have no clue as to what would be appropriate variable substitutes
for this message. Typically when I don't know, I put <value>, which
is vague/generic.
However, the context of this message makes we wonder if something more
specific can be used here. For is example is this message talking
about the number of parameters passed? If Yes, then I can use
<number> instead of <value>.
The current message text is:
XJ080 "USING execute statement passed {0} parameters rather than {1}."
--
Laura Stewart
Re: Re: SQL State XJ080 "USING execute statement passed {0} parameters rather than {1}."
Posted by Andrew McIntyre <mc...@gmail.com>.
On 9/8/06, Andrew McIntyre <mc...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 9/8/06, Laura Stewart <sc...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > I have no clue as to what would be appropriate variable substitutes
> > for this message. Typically when I don't know, I put <value>, which
> > is vague/generic.
> > However, the context of this message makes we wonder if something more
> > specific can be used here. For is example is this message talking
> > about the number of parameters passed? If Yes, then I can use
> > <number> instead of <value>.
> >
> > The current message text is:
> >
> > XJ080 "USING execute statement passed {0} parameters rather than {1}."
>
> Correct. Both of these would be numbers of parameters, however USING
> clauses for joins were removed before Derby was made opensource and
> this message is no longer used. It should probably be removed, unless
> someone is planning on reimplementing USING.
D'oh. This wasn't referring to USING clauses for joins but for EXECUTE
for prepared statements (also removed from Derby before being open
sourced).
andrew
Re: SQL State XJ080 "USING execute statement passed {0} parameters rather than {1}."
Posted by Andrew McIntyre <mc...@gmail.com>.
On 9/8/06, Laura Stewart <sc...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I have no clue as to what would be appropriate variable substitutes
> for this message. Typically when I don't know, I put <value>, which
> is vague/generic.
> However, the context of this message makes we wonder if something more
> specific can be used here. For is example is this message talking
> about the number of parameters passed? If Yes, then I can use
> <number> instead of <value>.
>
> The current message text is:
>
> XJ080 "USING execute statement passed {0} parameters rather than {1}."
Correct. Both of these would be numbers of parameters, however USING
clauses for joins were removed before Derby was made opensource and
this message is no longer used. It should probably be removed, unless
someone is planning on reimplementing USING.
andrew
Re: SQL State XJ080 "USING execute statement passed {0} parameters
rather than {1}."
Posted by "Jean T. Anderson" <jt...@bristowhill.com>.
Laura Stewart wrote:
> I have no clue as to what would be appropriate variable substitutes
> for this message. Typically when I don't know, I put <value>, which
> is vague/generic.
> However, the context of this message makes we wonder if something more
> specific can be used here. For is example is this message talking
> about the number of parameters passed? If Yes, then I can use
> <number> instead of <value>.
>
> The current message text is:
>
> XJ080 "USING execute statement passed {0} parameters rather than {1}."
>
yes, this is talking about the number of parameters passed.
-jean