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

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 (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackerspgsql-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

pgsql-hackers by date

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

pgsql-patches by date

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

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