Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: binary protocol, again

From: "P(dot) Christeas" <xrg(at)linux(dot)gr>
To: Daniele Varrazzo <daniele(dot)varrazzo(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: psycopg(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: binary protocol, again
Date: 2012-07-21 11:34:22
Message-ID: (view raw, whole thread or download thread mbox)
Lists: psycopg
On Saturday 21 July 2012, Daniele Varrazzo wrote:
> Why
> doesn't the cursor_bin (as you call it) always use only PQexecParams
> and the ISQLParam protocol for adaptation? 
> What is a case in which people would want to use the same cursor for
> the two param styles?
> No automatic switch between the two:...

In my case, I want an improved cursor, one that will simply be able to be 
"switched on" on existing applications. It is optional anyway and may be 
marked 'experimental' until its functionality is almost identical to the 
existing text cursors.

Using different classes, different adapters and in-transaction decisions (based 
on the detected psycopg2 version, too) inside the applications is IMHO much 
more messy (and expensive) than doing an automatic failover in the C library.

Say NO to spam and viruses. Stop using Microsoft Windows!

In response to

psycopg by date

Next:From: Raheem SarcarDate: 2012-07-26 06:11:33
Subject: Inconsistent results when calculating "age" of db records
Previous:From: Daniele VarrazzoDate: 2012-07-20 23:57:06
Subject: Re: binary protocol, again

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2017 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group