Re: [HACKERS] migration to v6.5
От | Tom Lane |
---|---|
Тема | Re: [HACKERS] migration to v6.5 |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 7419.932065797@sss.pgh.pa.us обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | migration to v6.5 (Michael J Schout <mschout@mail.gkg-com.com>) |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Michael J Schout <mschout@mail.gkg-com.com> writes: > My question is this: If the PGresult struct contains a PGconn member, > should there be an accessor function for it? Or is this member considered > to be private? If so, I guess I will have to rewrite a large section of > this application from scratch, but I thought I would check on the reasoning > for the move of the conn member here first. I had intended to remove that member entirely, but desisted in order to grant some breathing room to people in your situation ;-). For the moment you can access it if you include libpq-int.h in your application. The reasoning for removing it is that a PGresult could outlive the PGconn it was produced from, leaving you with a dangling pointer. I would like to remove it eventually, but probably won't do so for another version or two. regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: