From: | Merlin Moncure <mmoncure(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | Marko Kreen <markokr(at)gmail(dot)com>, Postgres Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: [patch] libpq one-row-at-a-time API |
Date: | 2012-07-24 15:56:40 |
Message-ID: | CAHyXU0zvDvj_5JJjodNMRWxao6muTmpFwW_O5Df+nFwQAZBLWg@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Tue, Jul 24, 2012 at 10:49 AM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> Merlin Moncure <mmoncure(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
>> I'm arguing that *all* data getting must continue to do so through the
>> result object, and bypassing the result to get at data is breaking the
>> result abstraction in the libpq api.
>
> That's a fair point, but the single-row mode without PQgetRowData still
> fits that model, doesn't it? From the point of view of libpqtypes it
> just looks like you got a lot of one-row query results.
Sure: Marko's exec_query_single_row example looks like 100% reasonable
libpq code. That said, I'd still spend a few cycles to think this
through and make sure we aren't walling ourselves off from 'copy free'
behavior, even if that's reserved for a future improvement. In
particular, I'd like to explore if PQsetSingleRowMode() should be
returning a result.
merlin
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Marko Kreen | 2012-07-24 16:08:28 | Re: [patch] libpq one-row-at-a-time API |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2012-07-24 15:49:17 | Re: [patch] libpq one-row-at-a-time API |