Re: PATCH: Batch/pipelining support for libpq

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
От Dave Cramer
Тема Re: PATCH: Batch/pipelining support for libpq
Дата
Msg-id CADK3HH+3K3q=pOWjShDPSP8vgKBZ=wP2tSCi1fSk7nXQvvCg1A@mail.gmail.com
обсуждение исходный текст
Ответ на Re: PATCH: Batch/pipelining support for libpq  (Matthieu Garrigues <matthieu.garrigues@gmail.com>)
Ответы Re: PATCH: Batch/pipelining support for libpq
Re: PATCH: Batch/pipelining support for libpq
Список pgsql-hackers


On Mon, 21 Sep 2020 at 09:21, Matthieu Garrigues <matthieu.garrigues@gmail.com> wrote:
Matthieu Garrigues

On Mon, Sep 21, 2020 at 3:09 PM Dave Cramer <davecramer@postgres.rocks> wrote:
>>
> There was a comment upthread a while back that people should look at the comments made in https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/20180322.211148.187821341.horiguchi.kyotaro%40lab.ntt.co.jp by Horiguchi-San.
>
> From what I can tell this has not been addressed. The one big thing is the use of PQbatchProcessQueue vs just putting it in PQgetResult.
>
> The argument is that adding PQbatchProcessQueue is unnecessary and just adds another step. Looking at this, it seems like putting this inside PQgetResult would get my vote as it leaves the interface unchanged.
>

Ok. I'll merge PQbatchProcessQueue into PQgetResult. But just one
thing: I'll keep PQgetResult returning null between the result of two
batched query so the user
can know which result comes from which query.

Fair enough.

There may be other things in his comments that need to be addressed. That was the big one that stuck out for me.

Thanks for working on this!


Dave Cramer
www.postgres.rocks 

В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления:

Предыдущее
От: Alvaro Herrera
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: Inconsistent Japanese name order in v13 contributors list
Следующее
От: Matthieu Garrigues
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: PATCH: Batch/pipelining support for libpq