Details
-
Type:
Enhancement
-
Status:
Open
-
Priority:
Major
-
Resolution: Unresolved
-
Affects Version/s: None
-
Fix Version/s: None
-
Component/s: None
-
Labels:None
Description
Useful for stored procedure results:
call_proc.clj
(defn call-stored-proc [connection]
(jdbc/query
(myapp.db/connection)
["{call someProc()}"]
:as-arrays? true))
Java code to handle multiple result sets:
MultiResults.java
public static void executeProcedure(Connection con) { try { CallableStatement stmt = con.prepareCall(...); ..... //Set call parameters, if you have IN,OUT, or IN/OUT parameters boolean results = stmt.execute(); int rsCount = 0; //Loop through the available result sets. while (results) { ResultSet rs = stmt.getResultSet(); //Retrieve data from the result set. while (rs.next()) { ....// using rs.getxxx() method to retieve data } rs.close(); //Check for next result set results = stmt.getMoreResults(); } stmt.close(); } catch (Exception e) { e.printStackTrace(); } }
Activity
Hide
Sean Corfield
added a comment -
Discussion with Pieter Laeremans:
Sean: My thinking is that I would add :multi-result? to execute! and query and then arrange for them to return sequences of result sets. Unraveling the calls so multi-result? can work cleanly inside those functions would be the hard part 
Pieter: That sounds fine by me. But there's something a bit more subtle I guess,
Now you can pass a function row-fn to transform rows, in the multi-resultset case it would perhaps be more appropriate
to pass on a seq of row-fns, so that a different function can be used on different rows.
Show
Sean Corfield
added a comment - Discussion with Pieter Laeremans:
Sean: My thinking is that I would add :multi-result? to execute! and query and then arrange for them to return sequences of result sets. Unraveling the calls so multi-result? can work cleanly inside those functions would be the hard part
Pieter: That sounds fine by me. But there's something a bit more subtle I guess,
Now you can pass a function row-fn to transform rows, in the multi-resultset case it would perhaps be more appropriate
to pass on a seq of row-fns, so that a different function can be used on different rows.
Pieter: That sounds fine by me. But there's something a bit more subtle I guess,
Now you can pass a function row-fn to transform rows, in the multi-resultset case it would perhaps be more appropriate
to pass on a seq of row-fns, so that a different function can be used on different rows.
Post 0.3.0, ideally after adding stored proc support properly (see JDBC-48).