From: | "Karl O(dot) Pinc" <kop(at)meme(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | "Shulgin, Oleksandr" <oleksandr(dot)shulgin(at)zalando(dot)de> |
Cc: | Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: PQsendQuery+PQgetResult+PQsetSingleRowMode limitations and support |
Date: | 2016-04-01 17:53:21 |
Message-ID: | 20160401125321.5c58247f@slate.meme.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Fri, 1 Apr 2016 05:57:33 +0200
"Shulgin, Oleksandr" <oleksandr(dot)shulgin(at)zalando(dot)de> wrote:
> On Apr 1, 2016 02:57, "Karl O. Pinc" <kop(at)meme(dot)com> wrote:
> >
> > I assume there are no questions about supporting a
> > similar functionality only without PQsetSingleRowMode,
> > as follows:
>
> Sorry, but I don't see what is your actual question here?
The question is whether or not the functionality of the first
script is supported. I ask since Bruce was surprised to see
this working and questioned whether PG was intended to behave
this way.
> Both code examples are going to compile and work, AFAICS. The
> difference is that the latter will try to fetch the whole result set
> into client's memory before returning you a PGresult.
Thanks for the clarification. For some reason I recently
got it into my head that the libpq buffering was on the server side,
which is really strange since I long ago determined it was
client side.
Karl <kop(at)meme(dot)com>
Free Software: "You don't pay back, you pay forward."
-- Robert A. Heinlein
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Pavel Stehule | 2016-04-01 17:57:51 | Re: syntax sugar for conditional check |
Previous Message | Jim Nasby | 2016-04-01 17:45:33 | Re: syntax sugar for conditional check |