Re: Incremental results from libpq

From: Frank van Vugt <ftm(dot)van(dot)vugt(at)foxi(dot)nl>
To: pgsql-interfaces(at)postgresql(dot)org
Cc: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Subject: Re: Incremental results from libpq
Date: 2005-11-10 16:51:54
Message-ID: 200511101751.55377.ftm.van.vugt@foxi.nl
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-interfaces

> > The main reason why libpq does what it does is that this way we do not
> > have to expose in the API the notion of a command that fails part way
> > through. If you support partial result fetching then you'll have to
> > deal with the idea that a SELECT could fail after you've already
> > returned some rows to the client.

I'm wondering, what kind of failure do you have in mind, here? If I'm informed
correctly then Oracle and others are generating the complete static result
set on the server-side, which will then stay cached until all rows/chunks are
fetched. The one failure that comes to mind in this scenario is that the
connection breaks down, but since informing the client would then be a bit
difficult, you'll certainly be referring to something else ;)

If PostgreSQL were to build the complete result-set before handing over the
first fetched rows/chunks, then I understand. Is that the case? Or something
else even...?

--
Best,

Frank.

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-interfaces by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2005-11-10 17:03:12 Re: Incremental results from libpq
Previous Message Frank van Vugt 2005-11-10 09:11:45 Re: Incremental results from libpq