Re: [HACKERS] psql and Control-C

From: Chris Bitmead <chrisb(at)nimrod(dot)itg(dot)telstra(dot)com(dot)au>
To: PostgreSQL Development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org>
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] psql and Control-C
Date: 2000-02-18 01:23:25
Message-ID: 38AC9F0D.4931DB92@nimrod.itg.telecom.com.au
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Alfred Perlstein wrote:

> Whoa whoa... It's a bit more complicated than you think, there's a lot
> of state that gets put into libpq,

I don't think this has anything to do with libpq. This has got to do
with
psql's reading of commands _before_ they get shoved into libpq. As such
it shouldn't be that dangerous.

> i guess the simplest way would be
> to do so and also cancel the transaction, but a simple longjump won't
> work reliably and you'd also have to take very careful steps to make
> sure you handle everything _just right_ from a signal context.
>
> I'd rather have the inconvience of psql exiting than a not entirely
> thought out mechanism for doing this properly potentially having psql
> run amok on my database. :)
>
> --
> -Alfred Perlstein - [bright(at)wintelcom(dot)net|alfred(at)freebsd(dot)org]
>
> ************

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Alfred Perlstein 2000-02-18 02:21:28 Re: [HACKERS] psql and Control-C
Previous Message Chris Bitmead 2000-02-18 01:20:55 Re: [HACKERS] psql and Control-C