| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Hiroshi Inoue <Inoue(at)tpf(dot)co(dot)jp>, Neil Conway <neilc(at)samurai(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: cursors outside transactions |
| Date: | 2003-03-18 06:00:43 |
| Message-ID: | 16839.1047967243@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> writes:
> Why don't you like (1)? It seems fine to me, and I don't see how we are
> magically going to do any better in the future.
The restrictions of (1) seem pretty obvious to me ... but I don't
see any prospect of doing better in the near future, either.
Cross-transaction cursors are a *hard* problem for us.
The question here is do we want to offer a half-baked solution,
recognizing that it's some improvement over no solution at all?
Or do we feel it doesn't meet our standards?
I could be talked into seeing it either way ...
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | R Blake | 2003-03-18 06:02:00 | Re: anyone? CREATELANG in pgsql 7.3.2 failing |
| Previous Message | Bruce Momjian | 2003-03-18 05:50:05 | Re: cursors outside transactions |