Re: Testing with concurrent sessions

From: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>
Cc: "David E(dot) Wheeler" <david(at)kineticode(dot)com>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Kevin Grittner <Kevin(dot)Grittner(at)wicourts(dot)gov>, Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Testing with concurrent sessions
Date: 2010-01-07 16:57:43
Message-ID: 603c8f071001070857p5a92310ak105e00a1922c525f@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Thu, Jan 7, 2010 at 11:46 AM, Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> wrote:
> Using DBI/DBD::Pg would raise another issue - what version of libpq would it
> be using? Not the one in the build being tested, that's for sure. If you
> really want to use Perl then either a Pure Perl DBI driver (which Greg has
> talked about) or a thin veneer over libpq such as we used to have in contrib
> seems a safer way to go.

I completely agree. As between those two options, count me as +1 for
the thin veneer.

...Robert

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2010-01-07 16:58:14 Re: Patch: Allow substring/replace() to get/set bit values
Previous Message Robert Haas 2010-01-07 16:55:49 Re: Streaming replication and postmaster signaling