Sorry, attached wrong patch. Here's the right one.
On Thu, Feb 2, 2017 at 10:04 AM, Ashutosh Bapat
<ashutosh.bapat@enterprisedb.com> wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 2, 2017 at 8:11 AM, Higuchi, Daisuke
> <higuchi.daisuke@jp.fujitsu.com> wrote:
>> From: Ashutosh Bapat [mailto:ashutosh.bapat@enterprisedb.com]
>>> Per the documentation [1], "PQgetResult must be called repeatedly
>>> until it returns a null pointer, indicating that the command is
>>> done.". The code in PQgetResult() under CONNECTION_CHECK_WRITABLE
>>> case, violates that. The patch fixes it. The patch however jumps to
>>> keep_going without changing conn->status, which means that it will end
>>> up again in the same case. While that's fine, may be we should use a
>>> local loop on PQgetResult() to keep the code readable.
>> Thank you for reviewing the patch.
>> I created it with reference to pqSetenvPoll() in interfaces/libpq/fe-protocol2.c,
>> but I certainly thought that readability is not good.
>> I updated the patch, so I will add this to the next commitfest.
>
> Thanks for the patch.
>
> The code expects that there will be two PQgetResult() calls required.
> One to fetch the result of SHOW command and the other to extract NULL.
> If we require more calls or unexpected results, we should throw and
> error. The patch just checks the first result and consumes the
> remaining without verifying them. Also, it looks like we can not clear
> result of PQgetResult() before using the values or copying them
> somewhere else [1]. Here's updated patch which tries to do that.
> Please let me know if this looks good to you.
>
>
> [1] https://www.postgresql.org/docs/devel/static/libpq-exec.html: PQgetvalue().
> --
> Best Wishes,
> Ashutosh Bapat
> EnterpriseDB Corporation
> The Postgres Database Company
--
Best Wishes,
Ashutosh Bapat
EnterpriseDB Corporation
The Postgres Database Company
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers