| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | The Hermit Hacker <scrappy(at)hub(dot)org> |
| Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: [HACKERS] LIBPQ patches ... |
| Date: | 2000-01-08 22:27:02 |
| Message-ID: | 9125.947370422@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
The Hermit Hacker <scrappy(at)hub(dot)org> writes:
> Does anyone have anything against me applying this to the current source
> tree?
I'm not particularly comfortable with it --- it looks like the semantics
need more careful thought, particularly concerning when the output buffer
gets flushed and what happens if we can't send data right away. The
insertion of a pqFlush into PQconsumeInput, in particular, looks like
an ill-thought-out hack that could break some applications.
I also object strongly to the lack of documentation. Patches that
change public APIs and come without doco updates should be rejected
out of hand, IMNSHO. Keeping the documentation up to date should
not be considered optional --- especially not when you're talking
about something that makes subtle and pervasive changes to library
behavior.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Ed Loehr | 2000-01-08 22:27:53 | Re: [HACKERS] Re: ERROR: out of free buffers: time to abort ! |
| Previous Message | The Hermit Hacker | 2000-01-08 21:53:39 | Re: [HACKERS] LIBPQ patches ... |