| From: | Dimitri Fontaine <dimitri(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)fr> |
|---|---|
| To: | Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> |
| Cc: | Dimitri Fontaine <dimitri(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)fr>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: PL/Python result metadata |
| Date: | 2012-01-16 20:01:19 |
| Message-ID: | m2ipkbwh68.fsf@2ndQuadrant.fr |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> writes:
> I deliberately chose not to do that, because the PL/Python API is
> intentionally totally different from the standard DB-API, and mixing in
> some semi-conforming look-alike would be quite confusing from both ends.
Fair enough.
> I think we should stick with the PL/Python API being a small layer on
> top of SPI, and let the likes of plpydbapi handle the rest.
I'm discovering that, and again, fair enough :)
Regards,
--
Dimitri Fontaine
http://2ndQuadrant.fr PostgreSQL : Expertise, Formation et Support
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Magnus Hagander | 2012-01-16 20:19:27 | pg_stat_database deadlock counter |
| Previous Message | Alvaro Herrera | 2012-01-16 19:52:36 | Re: foreign key locks, 2nd attempt |