From: | Marko Kreen <markokr(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | Postgres Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: [patch] libpq one-row-at-a-time API |
Date: | 2012-07-16 10:27:12 |
Message-ID: | CACMqXC+QAJvhAKDCqrjVzVF7gJnyDq1ZsXKM_f1GkjpzGoSjUQ@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Mon, Jul 16, 2012 at 4:11 AM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> Marko Kreen <markokr(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
>> Now, looking at the problem with some perspective, the solution
>> is obvious: when in single-row mode, the PQgetResult() must return
>> proper PGresult for that single row. And everything else follows that.
>
>> Such API is implemented in attached patch:
>
> I'm starting to look at this patch now. I think we could drop the
> PQgetRowData() API: it complicates matters for little gain that I can
> see. The argument for it was to avoid the cost of creating a PGresult
> per row, but we're already going to pay the cost of creating a
> PGresult in order to return the PGRES_SINGLE_TUPLE status.
No. Please look again, it is supposed to be called instead of PGgetResult().
--
marko
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2012-07-16 13:33:39 | Re: [patch] libpq one-row-at-a-time API |
Previous Message | Amit Kapila | 2012-07-16 06:07:05 | Re: CompactCheckpointerRequestQueue versus pad bytes |