Michael Meskes wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 23, 2004 at 09:27:40PM +0530, Shridhar Daithankar wrote:
>>What I wonder is, do we really need to maintain that level of lookup? Can't we
>>just say a connection is a 'struct connection *' which should be opaque and
>>should not be touched or poked inside, just like PGConn.
> I'm not sure I understand you correctly. The SQL standard says you can
> call your statement as this:
> exec sql at CONNECTION select 1;
> Here CONNECTION of course is a string, the name of the connection. So,
> yes, we have to maintain that list to make sure we get the right
> Or what were you asking?
I am asking for CONNECTION being a variable of data type 'connection *' rather
than 'const char *'. That would avoid name lookups.
Is that out of spec?
In response to
pgsql-hackers by date
|Next:||From: Karel Zak||Date: 2004-02-27 10:09:40|
|Subject: Re: [HACKERS] ORDER BY different locales|
|Previous:||From: Zeugswetter Andreas SB SD||Date: 2004-02-27 09:14:12|
|Subject: Re: Thread safe connection-name mapping in ECPG. Is it required?|