| From: | Marko Kreen <markokr(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Merlin Moncure <mmoncure(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Postgres Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: [patch] libpq one-row-at-a-time API |
| Date: | 2012-07-24 23:09:03 |
| Message-ID: | CACMqXCLj__3pdBWHn2hbabVzaWRasTiU2FYYdGnFy_LCV1-KfQ@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, Jul 25, 2012 at 1:29 AM, Merlin Moncure <mmoncure(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 24, 2012 at 4:59 PM, Marko Kreen <markokr(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>> So if we give only PQgetResult() in 9.2, I do not see that we
>> are locked out from any interesting optimizations.
>
> Well, you are locked out of having PQgetResult reuse the conn's result
> since that would then introduce potentially breaking changes to user
> code.
You can specify special flags to PQsend or have special PQgetResultWeird()
calls to get PGresults with unusual behavior. Like I did with PQgetRowData().
I see no reason here to reject PQgetResult() that returns normal PGresult.
--
marko
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Merlin Moncure | 2012-07-25 00:06:46 | Re: [patch] libpq one-row-at-a-time API |
| Previous Message | Merlin Moncure | 2012-07-24 22:32:34 | Re: [patch] libpq one-row-at-a-time API |