Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: updated patch for selecting large results sets

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>
Cc: Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>, pgsql-patches(at)postgresql(dot)org, chrisnospam(at)1006(dot)org
Subject: Re: updated patch for selecting large results sets
Date: 2006-08-28 23:20:57
Message-ID: 19854.1156807257@sss.pgh.pa.us (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackerspgsql-patches
Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> writes:
> OK, got it.  I just don't see the value to doing \g and not ;. I think
> the \gc case was a hack when he didn't have \set.  Now that we have
> \set, we should be consistent.

I'm willing to accept this if we can make sure we aren't adding any
overhead --- see my proposal elsewhere in the thread for fixing that.

			regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Chris MairDate: 2006-08-28 23:31:04
Subject: Re: updated patch for selecting large results sets in
Previous:From: Tom LaneDate: 2006-08-28 23:18:37
Subject: Re: autovacuum causing numerous regression-test failures

pgsql-patches by date

Next:From: Chris MairDate: 2006-08-28 23:31:04
Subject: Re: updated patch for selecting large results sets in
Previous:From: Bruce MomjianDate: 2006-08-28 23:08:07
Subject: Re: updated patch for selecting large results sets

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2014 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group