| From: | Oliver Jowett <oliver(at)opencloud(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Kris Jurka <books(at)ejurka(dot)com>, Hans-Jürgen Schönig <postgres(at)cybertec(dot)at>, eg(at)cybertec(dot)at, pgsql-patches(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Implementing RESET CONNECTION ... |
| Date: | 2005-01-04 01:33:09 |
| Message-ID: | 41D9F255.2030201@opencloud.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers pgsql-patches |
Tom Lane wrote:
> Fair point, but you could make the same argument against *any* side
> effect of RESET CONNECTION. You're just complaining about PREPARE
> because you can see immediately where that breaks JDBC. Anything that
> any driver does to set up per-connection state the way it wants will
> be equally vulnerable.
Yes, exactly.
> Perhaps RESET CONNECTION should be a protocol-level operation instead
> of a SQL command? That would prevent user-level code from causing it
> without the driver knowing.
I just suggested as much in another email (our emails crossed).
-O
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Bruce Momjian | 2005-01-04 03:29:51 | Re: oldish libpq bug still in RC2 |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2005-01-04 01:27:44 | Re: Implementing RESET CONNECTION ... |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Bruce Momjian | 2005-01-04 04:06:42 | Re: Implementing SELECT FOR UPDATE [NOWAIT] |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2005-01-04 01:27:44 | Re: Implementing RESET CONNECTION ... |