3 Replies Latest reply on Jan 5, 2017 8:43 AM by TSGal

    Probable New JDBC Bug

    fmpdude

      FMPA 14.0.6. MacOS 10.12.2

      ------------------------------------

       

      Trying to view a simple FileMaker table in my Java IDE, I got the unhelpful error message below.

       

      [08007] [FileMaker][FileMaker JDBC] Index: 2, Size: 2

       

      Was not able to find this on an Internet search and your JDBC document does not list, surprisingly, any error codes, but instead suggests I contact my "FileMaker Administrator". Huh? Why would you not list the error codes, by number, in a programmer's reference document?

       

      This looks like another JDBC bug.

       

      ----

       

      I understand that there is still no activity on the previous JDBC bug I reported many months ago regarding container fields.

       

      HOPE THIS HELPS.

        • 1. Re: Probable New JDBC Bug
          TSGal

          fmpdude:

           

          Thank you for your post.

           

          What kind of information are you trying to view?  Are any Container fields included?  Are any fields being referenced with more than 65,535 characters?

           

          Did this used to work prior to macOS Sierra 10.12.2?

           

          Any other information you can provide may be helpful.

           

          TSGal

          FileMaker, Inc.

          • 2. Re: Probable New JDBC Bug
            fmpdude

            It's just a table view and yes there are some container fields so maybe that wouldn't work?

             

            Don't recall prior to 10.12 for sure, but I think it worked.

             

            The error message is just plain awful. And, there's no way I could find, like in the ODBC/JDBC reference, to look it up. The error message should at least give me a clue, if possible.

             

            Any ideas?

             

            Thanks,

            • 3. Re: Probable New JDBC Bug
              TSGal

              fmpdude:

               

              I know there is an issue when a field is referenced that has 64K (65536) or more characters and another field follows it.  To see if this is the issue, temporarily omit the Container field(s) from being referenced.  If this still fails, see if any other field contains more than 65535 characters.  On the other hand, if it succeeds, try referencing the Container field at the end.

               

              TSGal

              FileMaker, Inc.