| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Pavel Stehule <stehule(at)kix(dot)fsv(dot)cvut(dot)cz> |
| Cc: | Dave Cramer <pg(at)fastcrypt(dot)com>, Neil Conway <neilc(at)samurai(dot)com>, "Jonah H(dot) Harris" <jharris(at)tvi(dot)edu>, Jan Wieck <JanWieck(at)Yahoo(dot)com>, Denis Lussier <denis(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Implementing SQL/PSM for PG 8.2 - debugger |
| Date: | 2005-06-28 13:51:20 |
| Message-ID: | 14668.1119966680@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Pavel Stehule <stehule(at)kix(dot)fsv(dot)cvut(dot)cz> writes:
>> What do you think you need for enhanced protocol ?
> What I need? Some like synchronous elog(NOTICE,''), which can return some
> user's interaction, if it's possible. I didn't find how I do it with
> current set of messages. But my knowleadges of protocol are minimal.
It'd probably be smarter to manage the debugging across a separate
connection, so that you could carry out debugging without requiring
sophisticated support for it inside the client program. If it's
single-connection then it will be essentially impractical to debug
except from a few specialized clients such as pgadmin; which will
make it hard to investigate behaviors that are only seen under load
from a client app.
I don't know exactly how to cause such a connection to get set up,
especially remotely. But we should try to think of a way.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Alvaro Herrera | 2005-06-28 13:54:43 | Re: Occupied port warning |
| Previous Message | Abhijit Menon-Sen | 2005-06-28 13:40:42 | Re: Occupied port warning |