FW: [Mono-list] DbDataAdapter.Fill patch

Tim Coleman tim@timcoleman.com
Tue, 28 Jan 2003 19:28:23 -0500

On Mon, 27 Jan 2003 18:46:43 -0200
"A Rafael D Teixeira" <rafaelteixeirabr@hotmail.com> wrote:

> >From: ville <ville.palo@koti.soon.fi>
> >To: "Daniel Morgan" <danmorg@sc.rr.com>
> >Subject: Re: FW: [Mono-list] DbDataAdapter.Fill patch
> >
> >Hi Daniel!
> >
> >I think Rodrigo or Tim Coleman knows better, but I can try something:
> >(if) There could be more than one datasource in one DataSet so this is
> >IMHO more reasonable way. But I'm not realy sure why "one DataAdapter
> >cannot be be able to perform all the needed updates."?
> >
> >
> >MSDN says: "Additional result sets are named by appending integral
> >values to the specified table name (for example, "Table", "Table1",
> >"Table2", and so on.)." That is you cant be sure the name of the table
> >is "Table".
> That is for additional result sets sent by the SAME SqlCommand. That occurs 
> when you call a Stored Procedure that executes many SELECTs, and led me to 
> many headaches, many of them, about table ordering ,when coupled with 
> typed-datasets.

This doesn't need to be a stored procedure call.  This could be a SqlCommand with multiple result sets, like 

select * from table1; select * from table2;

This would create two data tables within the dataset.

I can't talk much about this now, but when I get back from my trip
to Mexico next week I hope to devote some more time to cleaning up
this System.Data stuff.


Tim Coleman <tim@timcoleman.com>                       [43.43 N 80.45 W]
BMath, Honours Combinatorics and Optimization, University of Waterloo
Software Developer, Global Services, Open Text Corporation
"Under capitalism, man exploits man.  Under communism, it's just the
 opposite." -- J.K. Galbraith