In LibreOffice Base, I get an error when using a form with a subform based on a relation with a specific table. The database is an existing MySQL database on a remote host. I connect to it using the JDBC driver. I created the form like this: * Use Wizard to Create Form... * In 1. Field selection, select on table and all fields. * In 2. Set up a subform, add subform based on existing relation. * In 3, add all fields. * In 5, click next. * In 6, check all checkboxes. * In 7, click next. * In 8, click finish. The error message is: The data content could not be loaded. SQL Status: S1009 Value '214twente-online.nltwent43038���
Created attachment 109717 [details] Screenshot of error message
I have tried this with two versions, both give the error message: Version: 4.3.4.1 Build ID: bc356b2f991740509f321d70e4512a6a54c5f24 Version: 4.2.7.2 Build ID: 420m0(Build:2)
Please attach the actual form as screenshots aren't very useful in these scenarios. Marking as NEEDINFO. Once you attach, mark as UNCONFIRMED. Thanks
There is a lot of inromation in the screenshot about code, which shouldn't arrive a timestamp-field at all. Most of the code is text, not a timestamp. Something seems to be a PHP-warning. Are you able to read the timestamp-field in a normal mainform, not a subform?
> Are you able to read the timestamp-field in a normal mainform, not a subform? No. Just creating a single form of the "domein" table using the wizard results in this error.
(In reply to Sjoerd from comment #5) > > Are you able to read the timestamp-field in a normal mainform, not a subform? > > No. Just creating a single form of the "domein" table using the wizard > results in this error. So I will change the title. Has nothing to do wuth subform. Also ther must be a hint it appears with JDBC/MySQL. Have tested it with a MariaDB and JDBC, OpenSUSE 12.3 64bit rpm Linux. Created a form by the wizard for a table with a timestamp-field. Could open the form and see the timestamps without any error with LO 4.2.7.2. Also no problems with LO 4.3.4.1. Could you read the right value in the table, not in a form? The value, which is presented in the error message, shows a content, which isn't a timestamp but a hint where the server could be found and whot the server sends instead of a timestamp.
When I open the "domein" table, I get another error message: Value '0000-00-00 00:00:00' can not be represented as java.sql.Timestamp Although it prevents me from using the table, this error message is clear and understandable. Maybe with forms the wrong message is put in the exception?
(In reply to Sjoerd from comment #7) > When I open the "domein" table, I get another error message: > > Value '0000-00-00 00:00:00' can not be represented as java.sql.Timestamp > > Although it prevents me from using the table, this error message is clear > and understandable. > > Maybe with forms the wrong message is put in the exception? The error-message is nearly the same. There is content, which couldn't be shown as a timestamp, but seems to be defined as it. The error-message of the form shows also the content, the error-message of the table doesn't show it. The content of the field seem to be: '214twente-online.nl ... byte' This would be the same content you get, when you switch to Tools → SQL send a query like "SELECT * FROM Table". The content you get from your server isn't a timestamp. You would get the same error when using the direct connection, which is available here: http://extensions.libreoffice.org/extension-center/mysql-native-connector How do you connect to the server? There is something about PHP-Warning.
The texts you see in the error message are values from the database. There is one column in the database containing PHP options.
(In reply to Sjoerd from comment #7) > When I open the "domein" table, I get another error message: > > Value '0000-00-00 00:00:00' can not be represented as java.sql.Timestamp > Add a new parameter to your connection string on the same line as your database name : ?zeroDateTimeBehavior=convertToNull management of null datetime strings changed in mysql jdbc connector to throw an exception. This is not our bug, and there is a workaround.