Re: [HACKERS] Re: [INTERFACES] Revised proposal for libpq and FE/BE protocol changes

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
От Tom Lane
Тема Re: [HACKERS] Re: [INTERFACES] Revised proposal for libpq and FE/BE protocol changes
Дата
Msg-id 8692.893861428@sss.pgh.pa.us
обсуждение исходный текст
Ответ на Re: [INTERFACES] Revised proposal for libpq and FE/BE protocol changes  (watts@humbug.antnet.com)
Список pgsql-hackers
watts@humbug.antnet.com writes:
> I suggest the application already has fork or fork/exec to
> implement an  asynchronous design.

True, if you don't mind assuming you have threads then you could
dedicate one thread to blocking in libpq while your other threads manage
your user interface and so forth.  But most of these revisions would
still be useful in that situation.  The current libpq does not cope well
with query strings containing multiple commands; it doesn't cope at all
with queries that return more than one type of tuple; it requires dummy
queries (wasting both processing time and network bandwidth) to check
for NOTIFY messages; and so forth.  None of those problems can be solved
just by moving calls to libpq into a separate thread.

            regards, tom lane

В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления:

Предыдущее
От: Tom Lane
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: [HACKERS] Revised proposal for libpq and FE/BE protocol changes
Следующее
От: Peter Mount
Дата:
Сообщение: RE: [INTERFACES] Re: [HACKERS] Revised proposal for libpq and FE/BE protocol changes