Re: Silencing NOTICEs in Perl Pg

From: David Wheeler <david(at)wheeler(dot)net>
To: Bruno Wolff III <bruno(at)wolff(dot)to>
Cc: "David F(dot) Skoll" <dfs(at)roaringpenguin(dot)com>, Andrew Perrin <clists(at)perrin(dot)socsci(dot)unc(dot)edu>, pgsql-admin(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Silencing NOTICEs in Perl Pg
Date: 2002-08-29 19:11:09
Message-ID: 13A687F0-BB83-11D6-B671-0003931A964A@wheeler.net
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-admin

On Thursday, August 29, 2002, at 12:04 PM, Bruno Wolff III wrote:

> Just because it is the standard way doesn't mean its the best way.
> Pg is tied closely to libpg which may provide advantages in some cases.

DBD::Pg is built with libpg, too, IIRC.

> For example, I believe DBI has a lame way to do things when autocommit
> is off.
> It immediately starts a transaction rather than wait for a begin
> statement
> to be sent. This has consequences that may not always be desirable.

Hrm, I've never head DBI called "lame" before. But its advantages lie
in its standardization of database access. But yes, some might consider
that a limitation.

BTW, the relatively new DBI begin_work() method may have overcome the
issue you raise.

Regards,

David

--
David Wheeler AIM: dwTheory
david(at)wheeler(dot)net ICQ: 15726394
http://david.wheeler.net/ Yahoo!: dew7e
Jabber: Theory(at)jabber(dot)org

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-admin by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Michael Zouroudis 2002-08-29 19:16:33 Ref Int DELETE
Previous Message Bruno Wolff III 2002-08-29 19:04:27 Re: Silencing NOTICEs in Perl Pg