Re: Wire protocol docs

From: Dave Page <dpage(at)pgadmin(dot)org>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Abhijit Menon-Sen <ams(at)toroid(dot)org>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Wire protocol docs
Date: 2009-10-13 17:53:56
Message-ID: 937d27e10910131053n371b996ey98ae2f92b4e38001@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Tue, Oct 13, 2009 at 6:24 PM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> Dave Page <dpage(at)pgadmin(dot)org> writes:
>> Right. My complaint though, is that the docs imply that the info on
>> how those values get set is in the docs somewhere, which appears to be
>> incorrect.
>
> The libpq documentation does cover the fact that libpq uses those
> variables to establish initial settings.  I wouldn't expect it to
> go into implementation details, would you?

Not the libpq docs, no. I was expecting something to though, having
been told in the intro to the low level protocol details that:

"Higher level features built on this protocol (for example, how libpq
passes certain environment variables when the connection is
established) are covered elsewhere."

Note that it says *how* libpq passes those variables which implies the
mechanism of passing them to the server. Anyway, I can figure out what
I need from the existing code - I just found that sentence misleading
and think it should probably be removed.

--
Dave Page
EnterpriseDB UK: http://www.enterprisedb.com

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Dave Page 2009-10-13 18:07:52 Re: Client application name
Previous Message Josh Berkus 2009-10-13 17:53:12 Re: transaction_isolation vs. default_transaction_isolation