Handle null values for Timestamp JDBC parameters #5845
Merged
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
labkey-jeckels
approved these changes
Sep 10, 2024
labkey-adam
approved these changes
Sep 10, 2024
Contributor
|
@XingY thanks for tracking this down and fixing! |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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
There are a couple setObject functions that each takes a different set of params. PR #5805 modified all of those to call our own override version, which all end up calling the 2-parametere version of the util, if targetSqlType == Types.TIMESTAMP. This is not working well for null values (not sure why, but the old way uses the N param function for null values), see the following test failure.
ETLTest.testStoredProcTransforms
Related Pull Requests
Changes