From: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)dcc(dot)uchile(dot)cl> |
---|---|
To: | Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, PostgreSQL Development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: [INTERFACES] Roadmap for FE/BE protocol redesign |
Date: | 2003-03-18 23:15:49 |
Message-ID: | 20030318231549.GB2577@dcc.uchile.cl |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers pgsql-interfaces |
On Tue, Mar 18, 2003 at 05:18:02PM -0500, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> > Bruce Momjian writes:
> >
> > > What if folks want all their connections autocommit off.
> >
> > For interactive use, people can record their preferred setting in
> > ~/.psqlrc or something like that.
>
> But that only works for psql, right? How would this be done at the
> libpq level? Environment variables? GUC seems a whole lot cleaner.
I think an environment variable would be right. The current method is
not clean in the sense that a client cannot decide what she wants; she
just accepts the decision from the DBA. Thus, an application can't be
written with a certain value in mind, because the DBA can change the
setting at any time.
Client-side decision is the wiser proposal, I think.
> I understand. I just don't see any value in pushing that logic into
> each client when we can do it centrally in the server.
The server doesn't know beforehand what the client wants.
--
Alvaro Herrera (<alvherre[a]dcc.uchile.cl>)
"No renuncies a nada. No te aferres a nada"
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | R Blake | 2003-03-18 23:17:09 | Re: anyone? CREATELANG in pgsql 7.3.2 failing |
Previous Message | Merlin Moncure | 2003-03-18 22:34:19 | Re: PostgreSQL flamage on Slashdot |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Bruce Momjian | 2003-03-19 00:54:41 | Re: [INTERFACES] Roadmap for FE/BE protocol redesign |
Previous Message | Bruce Momjian | 2003-03-18 22:18:02 | Re: [INTERFACES] Roadmap for FE/BE protocol redesign |