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

From Matthieu Garrigues
Subject Re: PATCH: Batch/pipelining support for libpq
Date
Msg-id CAJkzx4S+hwDpJm95HT8e-m3RXfNECgBKrdiR1pN6wu8B2Xy8cA@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: PATCH: Batch/pipelining support for libpq  (Dave Cramer <davecramer@postgres.rocks>)
Responses Re: PATCH: Batch/pipelining support for libpq  (Dave Cramer <davecramer@postgres.rocks>)
List pgsql-hackers
Matthieu Garrigues

On Mon, Sep 21, 2020 at 3:09 PM Dave Cramer <davecramer@postgres.rocks> wrote:
>>
> There was a comment upthread a while back that people should look at the comments made in
https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/20180322.211148.187821341.horiguchi.kyotaro%40lab.ntt.co.jpby Horiguchi-San.
 
>
> From what I can tell this has not been addressed. The one big thing is the use of PQbatchProcessQueue vs just putting
itin PQgetResult.
 
>
> The argument is that adding PQbatchProcessQueue is unnecessary and just adds another step. Looking at this, it seems
likeputting this inside PQgetResult would get my vote as it leaves the interface unchanged.
 
>

Ok. I'll merge PQbatchProcessQueue into PQgetResult. But just one
thing: I'll keep PQgetResult returning null between the result of two
batched query so the user
can know which result comes from which query.



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Dave Cramer
Date:
Subject: Re: PATCH: Batch/pipelining support for libpq
Next
From: Alvaro Herrera
Date:
Subject: Re: Command statistics system (cmdstats)