| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Merlin Moncure <mmoncure(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Daniel Verite <daniel(at)manitou-mail(dot)org>, pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: libpq sendQuery -- getResult not returning until all queries complete |
| Date: | 2010-12-22 00:11:58 |
| Message-ID: | 8623.1292976718@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general |
Merlin Moncure <mmoncure(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> On Tue, Dec 21, 2010 at 6:49 PM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
>> If you just unconditionally flush there, it will result in an extra
>> network message in the normal case where there's not another query
>> to do. The current code is designed not to flush until it sends
>> ReadyForQuery.
> yeah, I was looking at that. I don't see an easy way to test if there
> is another query waiting to execute right there. Maybe a
> documentation patch is in order :-).
dest.c doesn't have the info available. I think that to do this, we'd
need to move the responsibility for calling pq_flush out to postgres.c.
Not sure if it's worth it.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | William Gordon Rutherdale (rutherw) | 2010-12-22 00:16:00 | Cannot unsubscribe |
| Previous Message | Matthias Müller | 2010-12-22 00:10:22 | Re: Understanding PG9.0 streaming replication feature |