You are right - we should. They are not exclusive.

Fixed patch:

diff --git a/dbd/apr_dbd_mysql.c b/dbd/apr_dbd_mysql.c
index 77fa5fb..3c0d911 100644
--- a/dbd/apr_dbd_mysql.c
+++ b/dbd/apr_dbd_mysql.c
@@ -1156,9 +1156,16 @@ static apr_dbd_t *dbd_mysql_open(apr_pool_t
*pool, const char *params,
     if (fields[4].value != NULL) {
         port = atoi(fields[4].value);
     }
-    if (fields[6].value != NULL &&
-        !strcmp(fields[6].value, "CLIENT_FOUND_ROWS")) {
-        flags |= CLIENT_FOUND_ROWS; /* only option we know */
+    if (fields[6].value != NULL) {
+        if (strstr(fields[6].value, "CLIENT_FOUND_ROWS")) {
+            flags |= CLIENT_FOUND_ROWS;
+        }
+        if (strstr(fields[6].value, "CLIENT_MULTI_STATEMENTS")) {
+            flags |= CLIENT_MULTI_STATEMENTS;
+        }
+        if (strstr(fields[6].value, "CLIENT_MULTI_RESULTS")) {
+            flags |= CLIENT_MULTI_RESULTS;
+        }
     }
     if (fields[7].value != NULL) {
         sql->fldsz = atol(fields[7].value);

On Sat, Oct 10, 2009 at 7:21 AM, Bojan Smojver <bojan@rexursive.com> wrote:
> Question here (I didn't look at the manual to check): are all these
> flags mutually exclusive? If they are not, we should have 3 ifs instead
> of if/else if, right?
>
> --
> Bojan
>
>



-- 
Marko Kevac