From: | "Jonah H(dot) Harris" <jharris(at)tvi(dot)edu> |
---|---|
To: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)surnet(dot)cl> |
Cc: | "Matthew T(dot) O'Connor" <matthew(at)zeut(dot)net>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Denis Lussier <denisl(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Dave Page <dpage(at)vale-housing(dot)co(dot)uk>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: PL/pgSQL Debugger Support |
Date: | 2005-06-23 18:06:53 |
Message-ID: | 42BAFA3D.3060003@tvi.edu |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers pgsql-patches |
Alvaro,
I agree, a protocol seems to generally be the best option.
-Jonah
Alvaro Herrera wrote:
>On Thu, Jun 23, 2005 at 01:40:18PM -0400, Matthew T. O'Connor wrote:
>
>
>>Tom Lane wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>>Denis Lussier <denisl(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> writes:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>I got to thinking it'd be kewl if PgAdmin3 supported an interactive
>>>>debugger for pl/pgsql.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>That's been kicked around before, although I don't think anyone wants to
>>>tie it to pgAdmin specifically. Check the archives...
>>>
>>>
>>I didn't find anything relevant after a quick search, but if memory
>>serves, one of the objections to PgAdmin was that it was windows only.
>>This of course is no longer true as of PgAdmin III 1.0. It now support
>>Win32, Linux and FreeBSD. So perhaps that objection is no longer valid.
>>
>>
>
>I think the point is that we will have to make some modifications to
>PL/pgSQL, so why not make sure we write something that any tool can use?
>Say, a well-defined BE/FE protocol extension.
>
>
>
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2005-06-23 18:08:22 | Re: regression failure |
Previous Message | Andrew Dunstan | 2005-06-23 17:55:51 | Re: regression failure |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Douglas McNaught | 2005-06-23 18:18:54 | Re: [PATCHES] O_DIRECT for WAL writes |
Previous Message | Alvaro Herrera | 2005-06-23 17:54:42 | Re: PL/pgSQL Debugger Support |