Re: dblink un-named connection doesn't get re-used

From: Decibel! <decibel(at)decibel(dot)org>
To: Decibel! <decibel(at)decibel(dot)org>
Cc: PostgreSQL-development list <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: dblink un-named connection doesn't get re-used
Date: 2007-10-18 14:29:08
Message-ID: 6BFC7FFB-263E-430A-9F90-ED71C32BE044@decibel.org
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Sorry for the self-reply...

On Oct 18, 2007, at 9:09 AM, Decibel! wrote:
> Is it intentional that dblink's unnamed connections don't get re-used?

From the dblink docs (both 8.1 and HEAD):

if only one argument is given, the connection is unnamed; only
one unnamed
connection can exist at a time

So this sounds to me like a bug.
--
Decibel!, aka Jim C. Nasby, Database Architect decibel(at)decibel(dot)org
Give your computer some brain candy! www.distributed.net Team #1828

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Heikki Linnakangas 2007-10-18 14:39:20 Re: Why copy_relation_data only use wal whenWALarchivingis enabled
Previous Message Magnus Hagander 2007-10-18 14:26:27 Strange error dropping foreign key