Re: Concurrent psql API - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Shane Ambler
Subject Re: Concurrent psql API
Date
Msg-id 47FCD2FA.4090202@Sheeky.Biz
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Concurrent psql API  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Responses Re: Concurrent psql API  (Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@commandprompt.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
Tom Lane wrote:
> Shane Ambler <pgsql@Sheeky.Biz> writes:
>> When switching to a conn we also need a non-destructive way out if it is 
>> busy.
> 
> Uh, why?  Why would you switch to a connection at all, if you didn't
> want its result?

What if you switch to the wrong connection and it hasn't finished. Do 
you then have to wait until you get the results before you can issue 
another command? Or will we be able to type commands while we wait for 
results?

I am thinking as currently happens - you can't type a command as you are 
waiting for a result. So if the connection you switch to is busy but you 
want to go to another connection then how do you?

This may tie into an 'auto new connection'. You start psql enter a 
command that will take a while then think of something else you can do 
as you wait. Do you open another shell and start psql again, or send the 
working task to the background and enter another command in a new 
connection?


Think jobs in a shell, you can suspend a long running process then send 
it to the background to work and go on with something else.


So I am thinking something like C-z that will allow you to switch out of 
a task that is waiting for results without having to stop it with C-c.



-- 

Shane Ambler
pgSQL (at) Sheeky (dot) Biz

Get Sheeky @ http://Sheeky.Biz


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: [PATCHES] libpq type system 0.9a
Next
From: Bruce Momjian
Date:
Subject: Re: Commit fest queue