Re: updated patch for selecting large results sets

From: Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>, pgsql-patches(at)postgresql(dot)org, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, chrisnospam(at)1006(dot)org
Subject: Re: updated patch for selecting large results sets
Date: 2006-08-28 23:08:07
Message-ID: 200608282308.k7SN87317504@momjian.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers pgsql-patches

Tom Lane wrote:
> Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> writes:
> > Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> >> Tom Lane wrote:
> >>> Wait a minute. What I thought we had agreed to was a patch to make
> >>> commands sent with \g use a cursor.
>
> > I am confused. I assume \g and ; should be affected, like Peter says.
> > Tom, what *every* command are you talking about? You mean \d?
>
> Like I said, I thought we were intending to modify \g's behavior only;
> that was certainly the implication of the discussion of "\gc".

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.

--
Bruce Momjian bruce(at)momjian(dot)us
EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com

+ If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your backup. +

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2006-08-28 23:18:37 Re: autovacuum causing numerous regression-test failures
Previous Message Tom Lane 2006-08-28 23:06:38 Re: updated patch for selecting large results sets in psql using cursors

Browse pgsql-patches by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2006-08-28 23:20:57 Re: updated patch for selecting large results sets
Previous Message Tom Lane 2006-08-28 23:06:38 Re: updated patch for selecting large results sets in psql using cursors