Re: [HACKERS] Implementing RESET CONNECTION ...

What did we decide on RESET CONNECTION. Do we want an SQL command or
something only the protocol can do?

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Oliver Jowett wrote:
> (cc'ing -hackers)
>
> Karel Zak wrote:
>
> > I think command status is common and nice feedback for client. I think
> > it's more simple change something in JDBC than change protocol that is
> > shared between more tools.
>
> There is a bit of a queue of changes that would be nice to have but
> require a protocol version change. If we're going to change the protocol
> for any of those we might as well handle RESET CONNECTION cleanly too.
>
> > We need some common way how detect on client what's happen on server --
> > a way that doesn't mean change protocol always when we add some
> > feature/command to backend. The command status is possible use for this.
>
> Command status only works if commands are directly executed. If you can
> execute the command indirectly, e.g. via a PL, then you'll miss the
> notification. Making RESET a top-level-only command isn't unreasonable,
> but using command status won't work as a general approach for notifying
> clients.
>
> We have a mechanism for GUC changes that uses a separate message
> (ParameterStatus). Perhaps that should be generalized to report
> different sorts of connection-related changes.
>
> -O
>
> ---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
> TIP 7: don't forget to increase your free space map settings
>

--
Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us
pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us | (610) 359-1001
+ If your life is a hard drive, | 13 Roberts Road
+ Christ can be your backup. | Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073