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

Re: libpq not reentrant

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>, Federico Di Gregorio <fog(at)initd(dot)org>, pgsql-bugs(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: libpq not reentrant
Date: 2002-01-18 19:49:35
Message-ID: (view raw, whole thread or download thread mbox)
Lists: pgsql-bugs
Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> writes:
> Tom Lane wrote:
>> That is entirely the wrong place to put it.  There is a section
>> specifically about libpq's reentrancy or lack of it; mention the
>> issue there.

> Uh, I put it in this section:

Um ... duh ... I can only plead momentary brain fade.  Yes, that
is the right section.

But I'd suggest moving it down a para or two, to put it next to the
para pointing out that PQoidStatus etc are not thread-safe.  That
was the context I was expecting to see.

Also, the "however" can be left out, and ditto "guarantted to be"
(which is mispelled anyway...)

			regards, tom lane

In response to


pgsql-bugs by date

Next:From: Bruce MomjianDate: 2002-01-18 20:38:24
Subject: Re: libpq not reentrant
Previous:From: Bruce MomjianDate: 2002-01-18 19:34:14
Subject: Re: libpq not reentrant

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