GH-47710: [C++][FlightRPC] Statement attribute Support in ODBC #47773
+700
−5
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
|
|
github-actions
bot
added
Component: C++
Component: FlightRPC
awaiting review
lidavidm
reviewed
Oct 10, 2025
github-actions
bot
added
awaiting changes
alinaliBQ
force-pushed
the
gh-47710-sql-stmt-attr
branch
from
42f4f14 to
1e025c7
Compare
github-actions
bot
added
awaiting change review
|
we worked on:
|
alinaliBQ
force-pushed
the
gh-47710-sql-stmt-attr
branch
from
1e025c7 to
be51a05
Compare
|
Rebased on top of |
lidavidm
reviewed
Oct 23, 2025
Comment on lines
39
to
48
| namespace { | ||
| // Helper Functions | ||
|
|
||
| // Validate SQLULEN return value | ||
| void ValidateGetStmtAttr(SQLHSTMT statement, SQLINTEGER attribute, | ||
| SQLULEN expected_value) { | ||
| SQLULEN value = 0; | ||
| SQLINTEGER string_length = 0; | ||
|
|
||
| ASSERT_EQ(SQL_SUCCESS, | ||
| SQLGetStmtAttr(statement, attribute, &value, sizeof(value), &string_length)); | ||
|
|
||
| EXPECT_EQ(expected_value, value); | ||
| } |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Instead of having variants for each type of comparison (equal, greater than, etc.) wouldn't it be better to just have a getter for each type, and keep the assertion in the tests themselves? (It could throw on failure, for instance, to keep the signature simple.)
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Yea that makes sense. I added getters, please let me know what you think
github-actions
bot
added
awaiting changes
Co-Authored-By: rscales <[email protected]>
Add tests for setting and getting statement attributes Co-Authored-By: rscales <[email protected]>
- use `platform.h` - move `connect/disconnect` to `setup/teardown` - in-progress on subclassing test fixture Co-authored-by: justing-bq <[email protected]> Co-authored-by: alinalibq <[email protected]>
- remove `using List = std::list<T>;`
alinaliBQ
force-pushed
the
gh-47710-sql-stmt-attr
branch
from
be51a05 to
aebac29
Compare
github-actions
bot
added
awaiting change review
alinaliBQ
commented
Oct 28, 2025
Comment on lines
39
to
48
| namespace { | ||
| // Helper Functions | ||
|
|
||
| // Validate SQLULEN return value | ||
| void ValidateGetStmtAttr(SQLHSTMT statement, SQLINTEGER attribute, | ||
| SQLULEN expected_value) { | ||
| SQLULEN value = 0; | ||
| SQLINTEGER string_length = 0; | ||
|
|
||
| ASSERT_EQ(SQL_SUCCESS, | ||
| SQLGetStmtAttr(statement, attribute, &value, sizeof(value), &string_length)); | ||
|
|
||
| EXPECT_EQ(expected_value, value); | ||
| } |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Yea that makes sense. I added getters, please let me know what you think
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
2 participants
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Rationale for this change
Support for getting and setting statement attributes in ODBC is added.
What changes are included in this PR?
SQLGetStmtAttrandSQLSetStmtAttrto get and set statement attributes.Are these changes tested?
Will be tested in CI when PR is ready for review
Are there any user-facing changes?
No