On 2021-Jul-08, Boris Kolpackov wrote:
> Alvaro Herrera <alvaro.herrera@2ndquadrant.com> writes:
>
> > To be honest, I am hesitant to changing the charter in that way; I fear
> > it may have consequences I don't foresee. I think the workaround is not
> > *that* bad.
>
> Ok, fair enough. I've updated my code to account for this and it seems
> to be working fine now.
Great, thanks. I have pushed the fix, so beta3 (when it is released)
should work well for you.
https://git.postgresql.org/gitweb/?p=postgresql.git;a=commitdiff;h=ab09679429009bfed4bd894a6187afde0b7bdfcd
> How about the following for the second sentence:
>
> "In particular, a call to <function>PQisBusy</function> in the middle
> of a pipeline returns 0 if all the results for queries issued so far
> have been consumed."
I used this wording, thanks.
On 2021-Jul-08, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> Looking at this again, I noticed that I could probably do away with the
> switch on pipelineStatus, and just call pqPipelineProcessQueue in all
> cases when appending commands to the queue; I *think* that will do the
> right thing in all cases. *Except* that I don't know what will happen
> if the program is in the middle of processing a result in single-row
> mode, and then sends another query: that would wipe out the pending
> results of the query being processed ... but maybe that problem can
> already occur in some other way.
I tried this and it doesn't work. It doesn't seem interesting to
pursue anyway, so I'll just drop the idea. (I did notice that the
comment on single-row mode was wrong, though, since
pqPipelineProcessQueue does nothing in READY_MORE state, which is what
it is in the middle of processing a result.)
Thanks for all the help in testing and reviewing,
--
Álvaro Herrera 39°49'30"S 73°17'W — https://www.EnterpriseDB.com/
"El hombre nunca sabe de lo que es capaz hasta que lo intenta" (C. Dickens)
