From: | "Katsaros Kwn/nos" <ntinos(at)aueb(dot)gr> |
---|---|
To: | Richard Huxton <dev(at)archonet(dot)com> |
Cc: | PostgreSQL General <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Postgres Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Networking feature for postgresql... |
Date: | 2004-10-14 08:36:15 |
Message-ID: | 1097742975.5274.18.camel@localhost.localdomain |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general pgsql-hackers |
Well, actually no :) ! Thanks for the hint!
But just from curiosity, would the scenario I described work?
I mean is it possible for an SPI process to run in the background while
other SPI calls are made?
Ntinos Katsaros
On Thu, 2004-10-14 at 11:15, Richard Huxton wrote:
> Katsaros Kwn/nos wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > I'm trying to add a -project specific- networking feature to my postgres
> > build (or database as function). What I want to do is to send a Query
> > instance (as a String-retrieved through an SPI function) to other
> > machines and (after they have executed it) to receive result tuples.
> > It's about a mediator-wrapper project. My first thought was to write 2
> > SPI functions (one for the server (concurrent) and the other for client)
> > but I'm not sure if this is going to work. I'm worried about setting up
> > the server process running on the background while other SPI calls are
> > made.
>
> Have you looked at the dblink code?
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | BARTKO | 2004-10-14 08:48:59 | |
Previous Message | Richard Huxton | 2004-10-14 08:15:31 | Re: Networking feature for postgresql... |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | David Garamond | 2004-10-14 08:57:21 | Re: Embedded postgresql |
Previous Message | Richard Huxton | 2004-10-14 08:15:31 | Re: Networking feature for postgresql... |