Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: [HACKERS] More thoughts about FE/BE protocol

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Bruce Badger <bruce_badger(at)badgerse(dot)com>
Cc: pgsql-interfaces(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] More thoughts about FE/BE protocol
Date: 2003-04-10 23:29:30
Message-ID: 7705.1050017370@sss.pgh.pa.us (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackerspgsql-interfaces
Bruce Badger <bruce_badger(at)badgerse(dot)com> writes:
> Is SYNC going to be a new kind of message?  Is the SYNC response yet
> another?

Yes; no.  SYNC response already exists: it's ReadyForQuery (Z).

> Either way, could this be used as a keep-alive for long-lived
> connections?  (some users of the current Smalltalk drivers report that
> long lived connections over the Internet sometimes just die)

If you're worried about that, Q with an empty query already suffices,
though SYNC will work too.

I'd be inclined to think that such breakage isn't our problem though;
anyone suffering from it needs to fix their firewall timeouts ...

> Also, with the new protocol, will the number of affected rows be 
> returned in a way that does not require parsing to fish it out?

I'm not planning to change the contents of messages more than I have to.
What's so hard about parsing "UPDATE nnn" ?

			regards, tom lane


In response to

Responses

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Sean ChittendenDate: 2003-04-11 01:15:57
Subject: Re: Speed of SSL connections; cost of renegotiation
Previous:From: Tom LaneDate: 2003-04-10 22:50:02
Subject: Speed of SSL connections; cost of renegotiation

pgsql-interfaces by date

Next:From: Sean ChittendenDate: 2003-04-11 01:15:57
Subject: Re: Speed of SSL connections; cost of renegotiation
Previous:From: Tom LaneDate: 2003-04-10 22:50:02
Subject: Speed of SSL connections; cost of renegotiation

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2014 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group