From: | Dmitriy Igrishin <dmitigr(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Marko Tiikkaja <marko(at)joh(dot)to> |
Cc: | Daniele Varrazzo <daniele(dot)varrazzo(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: libpq connection status and closed fd |
Date: | 2014-09-22 08:45:51 |
Message-ID: | CAAfz9KPjVLi+i9x=C-YYQ5zakZcJfJRdERQnmVpgXB5_4Fg-dw@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
2014-09-22 12:36 GMT+04:00 Marko Tiikkaja <marko(at)joh(dot)to>:
> On 9/22/14 9:45 AM, Dmitriy Igrishin wrote:
>
>> 2014-09-22 11:35 GMT+04:00 Daniele Varrazzo <daniele(dot)varrazzo(at)gmail(dot)com>:
>>
>> On Mon, Sep 22, 2014 at 8:17 AM, Dmitriy Igrishin <dmitigr(at)gmail(dot)com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Why are you using close() instead of PQfinish()?
>>>>
>>>
>>> Because I'm testing for an error, please read my message and the
>>> original bug report.
>>>
>>> I read it. You are testing for an error, but use libpq in a wrong way in
>> your test case. You must use PQfinish() to close the connection
>> and PQstatus() will works for you.
>>
>
> Perhaps you should go back and re-read it then. The point of the test
> case is not to test connection closure; it's to test behaviour in the
> presence of network errors.
And where the network error emulation in the test case? By closing fd?
I'm sorry if I don't understand something, but really, I don't see any
problem
or incorrect behavior of *libpq*. It's behavior adequate to a test case.
>
>
>
> .marko
>
--
// Dmitriy.
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Andres Freund | 2014-09-22 08:57:10 | Re: libpq connection status and closed fd |
Previous Message | Marko Tiikkaja | 2014-09-22 08:36:26 | Re: libpq connection status and closed fd |