From: | Peter T Mount <psqlhack(at)retep(dot)org(dot)uk> |
---|---|
To: | hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: [HACKERS] Proposal for async support in libpq |
Date: | 1998-04-19 21:44:33 |
Message-ID: | Pine.LNX.3.95.980419223421.23997D-100000@retep.org.uk |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Just a thought. Tom is after some scheme to receive notification messages,
out side the normal network stream, then why not add a second network
connection for this.
We could have in libpq, some new calls, to open, handle requests, and to
close the connection. It's then up to the client to handle these, so
existing clients will not be broken.
This would be a doddle to do in Java, and shouldn't be too difficult for
libpq, and libpgtcl (call backs are almost as simple to do in tcl as they
are in Java).
Just a couple of thoughts...
--
Peter T Mount peter(at)retep(dot)org(dot)uk or petermount(at)earthling(dot)net
Main Homepage: http://www.demon.co.uk/finder (moving soon to www.retep.org.uk)
************ Someday I may rebuild this signature completely ;-) ************
Work Homepage: http://www.maidstone.gov.uk Work EMail: peter(at)maidstone(dot)gov(dot)uk
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Michael Richards | 1998-04-19 22:05:04 | Re: [HACKERS] Leaks? |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 1998-04-19 18:02:33 | Re: [HACKERS] Proposal for async support in libpq |