Re: Concurrent connections in psql patch

From: Gregory Stark <gsstark(at)mit(dot)edu>
To: Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>
Cc: Gregory Stark <gsstark(at)mit(dot)edu>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-patches(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Concurrent connections in psql patch
Date: 2006-09-03 21:09:44
Message-ID: 87fyf83bdz.fsf@stark.xeocode.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers pgsql-patches

Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> writes:

> Is this something people are interested in? I am thinking no based on
> the lack of requests and the size of the patch.

Lack of requests? I was actually surprised by how enthusiastically people
reacted to it.

However I don't think the patch as is is ready to be committed. Aside from
missing documentation and regression tests it was only intended to be a
proof-of-concept and to be useful for specific tests I was doing.

I did try to do a decent job, I got \timing and server-tracked variables like
encoding. But I need to go back through the code and make sure there are no
other details like that.

It would be nice to get feedback from other developers from looking at the
patch to confirm that there aren't more fundamental problems with the approach
and how it uses libpq before I go through the effort of cleaning up the
details.

--
Gregory Stark
EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Martijn van Oosterhout 2006-09-03 21:32:51 Re: Getting a move on for 8.2 beta
Previous Message Gregory Stark 2006-09-03 20:56:51 Re: Optimizing prepared statements

Browse pgsql-patches by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Michael Glaesemann 2006-09-03 22:52:29 Re: [HACKERS] Interval aggregate regression failure (expected seems
Previous Message Tom Lane 2006-09-03 19:47:47 Re: [HACKERS] Interval aggregate regression failure (expected seems