Re: PATCH: Batch/pipelining support for libpq - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From David Steele
Subject Re: PATCH: Batch/pipelining support for libpq
Date
Msg-id 41685247-0a06-1fbb-d731-1b2b6bd8df8e@pgmasters.net
Whole thread Raw
In response to PATCH: Batch/pipelining support for libpq  (Craig Ringer <craig@2ndquadrant.com>)
Responses Re: PATCH: Batch/pipelining support for libpq  (Vaishnavi Prabakaran <vaishnaviprabakaran@gmail.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
Hi,

On 3/30/17 2:12 PM, Daniel Verite wrote:
>     Vaishnavi Prabakaran wrote:
>
>> Hmm, With batch mode, after sending COPY command to server(and server
>> started processing the query and goes into COPY state) , client does not
>> immediately read the result , but it keeps sending other queries to the
>> server. By this time, server already encountered the error
>> scenario(Receiving different message during COPY state) and sent error
>> messages
>
> IOW, the test intentionally violates the protocol and then all goes wonky
> because of that.
> That's why I was wondering upthread what's it's supposed to test.
> I mean, regression tests are meant to warn against a desirable behavior
> being unknowingly changed by new code into an undesirable behavior.
> Here we have the undesirable behavior to start with.
> What kind of regression could we fear from that?

The CF has been extended until April 7 but time is still growing short. 
Please respond with a new patch by 2017-04-04 00:00 AoE (UTC-12) or this 
submission will be marked "Returned with Feedback".

Thanks,
-- 
-David
david@pgmasters.net



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: David Steele
Date:
Subject: Re: PATCH: pageinspect / add page_checksum andbt_page_items(bytea)
Next
From: David Steele
Date:
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Transaction traceability - txid_status(bigint)