Re: pg_transaction_status() unreliable?!

In response to ljb <ljb1813(at)pobox(dot)com>:

> wmoran(at)potentialtech(dot)com wrote:
> >...
> >
> > Not that it says anything about PQtransactionStatus being affected by
> > the use of it. If I read this literally, PQgetResult could return a
> > result set that is incomplete, which begs the question: how do I merge
> > the remaining part of the result set when I get it back next time?
> >
> > Of course, that's not the intended usage, which leads me to wonder
> > what's going on when I know factually that I have no more query
> > results pending, yet I have to call it again (apparently) to update
> > the client's internal status data structures.
>
> Actually pg_transaction_status doesn't talk to the server at all. The
> information it needs is available at the client side. What is happening is
> that you are calling pg_transaction_status before you and the server have
> finished discussing the COMMIT (meaning, you haven't called pg_get_result
> enough to finish the protocol). So the client side hasn't been told that the
> transaction is over.

So you're saying that pg_get_result() returns the "result" of the query,
even though the query isn't complete yet. Then I have to call it again to
update the client-side information on the status of the connection.

As I said, if it's what needs to be done, then fine. But it still
doesn't seem logical to me.

--
Bill Moran
http://www.potentialtech.com
http://people.collaborativefusion.com/~wmoran/