Re: OO Patch - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Chris
Subject Re: OO Patch
Date
Msg-id 39264CD8.5895115@bitmead.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: OO Patch  (Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net>)
Responses Re: OO Patch  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Re: OO Patch  (Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us>)
Re: OO Patch  (The Hermit Hacker <scrappy@hub.org>)
List pgsql-hackers
Tom Lane wrote:
> 
> Hannu Krosing <hannu@tm.ee> writes:
> >> Certainly libpq is unprepared to support
> >> multiple tuple types returned in one SELECT
> 
> > IIRC Bruce removed that feature in Pg95 days claiming that it would
> > not be needed. If backend starts to support it again it would be
> > relatively easy to put back in.
> 
> Would it?  libpq's internals might not care much, but it seems to me
> that a rather significant API change would be needed, thus risking
> breaking client applications.  I'd want to see how the libpq API
> changes before deciding how easy or hard this is ...

The current API would not change. New APIs would be added. One option is
just add PQnfieldsv(result, tuple_number) to find the number of fields
in a particular tuple.

But then we started discussing postgres' lack of streaming result sets
and how we might rectify that at the same time.

And then it was discussed that PQ will be thrown out in favour of Corba
anyway.

And then I couldn't figure out where the project is heading, so I didn't
know what to work on, so I didn't. I want to know up front if PQ is
disappearing in favour of Corba or not.


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: "Hiroshi Inoue"
Date:
Subject: RE: Performance (was: The New Slashdot Setup (includes MySql server))
Next
From: Chris
Date:
Subject: Re: OO Patch