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

Re: Incremental results from libpq

From: Frank van Vugt <ftm(dot)van(dot)vugt(at)foxi(dot)nl>
To: pgsql-interfaces(at)postgresql(dot)org
Cc: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Subject: Re: Incremental results from libpq
Date: 2005-11-10 16:51:54
Message-ID: 200511101751.55377.ftm.van.vugt@foxi.nl (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-interfaces
> > The main reason why libpq does what it does is that this way we do not
> > have to expose in the API the notion of a command that fails part way
> > through.  If you support partial result fetching then you'll have to
> > deal with the idea that a SELECT could fail after you've already
> > returned some rows to the client.

I'm wondering, what kind of failure do you have in mind, here? If I'm informed 
correctly then Oracle and others are generating the complete static result 
set on the server-side, which will then stay cached until all rows/chunks are 
fetched. The one failure that comes to mind in this scenario is that the 
connection breaks down, but since informing the client would then be a bit 
difficult, you'll certainly be referring to something else ;)

If PostgreSQL were to build the complete result-set before handing over the 
first fetched rows/chunks, then I understand. Is that the case? Or something 
else even...?





-- 
Best,




Frank.

In response to

Responses

pgsql-interfaces by date

Next:From: Tom LaneDate: 2005-11-10 17:03:12
Subject: Re: Incremental results from libpq
Previous:From: Frank van VugtDate: 2005-11-10 09:11:45
Subject: Re: Incremental results from libpq

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