Mapping SQLInsert and CheckTypeExpression

[RobertSchuitemaker]

I've been migrating an existing project using a SQL server database to use a Postgres database. The project uses FluentNHibernate 2.1.2.

Part of the mappings uses a Stored Procedure call to do an upsert in the DB on inserting or updating a record as follows:

 private const string UpsertStoredProcedureCall = "EXEC [{0}].[pAgentStatusUpsert] @LastResponseTime=?, @AgentId=?";

        public AgentStatusMap()
        {
            Id(x => x.Id) 
                .Column(NamingConventions.GetIdColumnName(typeof(AgentId)))
                .GeneratedBy.Assigned();

            Map(x => x.LastResponseTime);

            SqlInsert(string.Format(UpsertStoredProcedureCall, Schemas.Config));
            SqlUpdate(string.Format(UpsertStoredProcedureCall, Schemas.Config)); 
        }

The stored procedure in SQL server has no specific return value, so I expect it to return '0' (success) after it is executed.
After migrating to Postgres my code suddenly fails with

"Batch update returned unexpected row count from update; actual row count: -1; expected: 1"

The postgres stored procedure call is defined as follows:

private const string UpsertStoredProcedureCall = "CALL {0}.pAgentStatusUpsert (par_LastResponseTime:=?, par_AgentId:=?);";
What I can't figure out is why it's expecting 1? How does it determine that? SQL server is returning a 0, but Fluent doesn't throw an error on that?

The only way I have been able to get it to work is to disable checking using this
`
SqlInsert(string.Format(UpsertStoredProcedureCall, Schemas.Config)).Check.None();

`
Which seems counter productive.

[RobertSchuitemaker]

Thinking about this further.
As we don't use 'SET NOCOUNT ON;' in SQL Server, it will (also?) return the number of rows effected, which will be 1. This is what is likely being used as the check condition after performing an ExecuteNonQuery within NHibernate.

But it looks like Postgres doesn't support returning the number of rows effected when executing a stored procedure. You could write the statement as a function and use 'GET DIAGNOSTICS' to return the number of rows effected, but you would have to write some custom validation to handle the result.

So it looks like using Check.None() is the solution for this.