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

Re: Re: libpq++

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: justinb(at)tricord(dot)com
Cc: Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>, PostgreSQL-interfaces <pgsql-interfaces(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Re: libpq++
Date: 2001-05-03 19:42:16
Message-ID: 818.988918936@sss.pgh.pa.us (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-interfaces
Justin Banks <justinb(at)tricord(dot)com> writes:
> You're right - this only works because the shared connections all
> occur in the same address space. It doesn't buy you anything between
> applications, only inside an application. The problem is that there's
> no way for different instantiations of classes inheriting
> database-ness from the PgDatabase class to share a PGconn* unless the
> PgDatabase class provides a way for different instantiations to know
> that existing connections are available.

And what's wrong with a static class variable for that purpose?
The shmem segment looks like the hardest possible way to get the
same result.

			regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

pgsql-interfaces by date

Next:From: Justin BanksDate: 2001-05-03 21:05:43
Subject: Re: Re: libpq++
Previous:From: Justin BanksDate: 2001-05-03 19:37:24
Subject: Re: Re: libpq++

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