Обсуждение: PHP and PostgreSQL
I have been asked by the major PHP developer Rasmus Lerdorf to see if the PostgreSQL/PHP interface needs any improvements. Is the current PostgreSQL interface module in PHP adequate? Does it support all the current libpq features? If not, would someone submit some patches to the PHP folks. They want us to work well with PHP. They are basically encouraging us to improve it in any way we can. -- Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us pgman@candle.pha.pa.us | (610) 853-3000+ If your life is a hard drive, | 830 Blythe Avenue + Christ can be your backup. | Drexel Hill, Pennsylvania19026
Bruce Momjian wrote: > > I have been asked by the major PHP developer Rasmus Lerdorf to see if > the PostgreSQL/PHP interface needs any improvements. > > Is the current PostgreSQL interface module in PHP adequate? Does it > support all the current libpq features? > > If not, would someone submit some patches to the PHP folks. They want > us to work well with PHP. They are basically encouraging us to improve > it in any way we can. In a current project, I am using Postgres, Oracle, and PHP. I think PHP's API is very complete and usable, I can't think of anything we've run into that was a result of PHP lacking a feature. The only thing I'd like to see would be an Oracle construct moved to Postgres. The idea that we can "prepare" a statement then execute it multiple times without going through the planner more than once. This would also require the ability to create and set arbitrary variables in a Postgres session. Since these are programmatic queries, only a handful of different SQL queries are ever executed. The ability to cache the planned query tree (is this the right terminology?) in a shared block, and simply reuse it, in the multiple back-ends, with a new variable value, would speed up some of the more complex queries, I guess. -- http://www.mohawksoft.com
I have been asked by the major PHP developer Rasmus Lerdorf to see ifthe PostgreSQL/PHP interface needs any improvements. Is the current PostgreSQL interface module in PHP adequate? Does itsupport all the current libpq features? The only problem we have run into (and I have heard of others having this problem also) is with persistent connections. I have seen discussion on persistent connection problems but I'm not sure the problem was ever resolved. The problem we have seen is that when using persistent connections the web server doesn't seen to reuse the connections or somthing to that effect. The result being that we eventually use up our postgres limit of 48 connections and nothing can connect to postgre anymore. It is possible that this is a configuration problem that we haven't sufficiently investigated, but I meniton it because I have heard other talk of this. Anyone have more information? Matthew
Bruce Momjian wrote: > > I have been asked by the major PHP developer Rasmus Lerdorf to see if > the PostgreSQL/PHP interface needs any improvements. > > Is the current PostgreSQL interface module in PHP adequate? Does it > support all the current libpq features? > > If not, would someone submit some patches to the PHP folks. They want > us to work well with PHP. They are basically encouraging us to improve > it in any way we can. If I can put my 0.02 Euros, I think there are two issues that deserve to be fixed, both are relative to persistent connections. The first is that the transaction state is (obviously) kept between connections. This is not a problem in itself, but there are some situations where the transaction block is not closed with COMMIT or ABORT with the obvious consequencies when the connection is reused (and with the locks not released). As a workaround I registered a shutdown funcion that sends an ABORT command every time a script finishes his processing but this results in a "Not in trasaction block" error most of the time (harmless but pretty annoying). IMHO there should be some sort of lightweight reset that puts the connection in its pristine state without the need to fork a backend againg and reopen the TCP connection. The second is that if PostgreSQL is restarted, PHP doesn't detect that and an error message is seen for every persistent connection. IMHO PHP should detect a closed connection and clear the connections pool. Bye! -- Daniele -------------------------------------------------------------------------------Daniele Orlandi - Utility Line Italia - http://www.orlandi.comViaMezzera 29/A - 20030 - Seveso (MI) - Italy -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> The only problem we have run into (and I have heard of others having this
> problem also) is with persistent connections. I have seen discussion on
> persistent connection problems but I'm not sure the problem was ever
> resolved. The problem we have seen is that when using persistent
> connections the web server doesn't seen to reuse the connections or
somthing
> to that effect. The result being that we eventually use up our postgres
> limit of 48 connections and nothing can connect to postgre anymore. It is
> possible that this is a configuration problem that we haven't sufficiently
> investigated, but I meniton it because I have heard other talk of this.
> Anyone have more information?
The *real* problem with persistent connections is:
Script1: BEGIN;
Script1: UPDATE table set row = 'things';
Script2: Insert into table (id) values ('bad data');
Script1: COMMIT;
Since script2 managed to do a BAD insert in the middle of script1's
transaction, the transaction in script1 fails. Obvious solution? Don't do
connection sharing when a transaction is enabled. The whole persistent
connection thing is only valid for mysql as it's the only thing that doesn't
really support transactions (and even thats partially changed).
They need to look for stuff going through (keywords like BEGIN) and 'lock'
that connection to the single entity that opened it.
It's much easier to write your own. I wrote a few functions like:
get_connection('DB PARMS');
begin_transaction();
commit_transaction();
close_connection();
All of this is done in a class which has knowledge of all connections that a
script is currently using. Beginning a transaction locks down the
connection from use by any other handler, they're all bumped to another one.
Problem? It requires atleast 1 connection per page, but since they're
actually dropped at close it's not so bad.
Matthew wrote: > > I have been asked by the major PHP developer Rasmus Lerdorf to see > if > the PostgreSQL/PHP interface needs any improvements. > > Is the current PostgreSQL interface module in PHP adequate? Does it > support all the current libpq features? > > The only problem we have run into (and I have heard of others having this > problem also) is with persistent connections. I have seen discussion on > persistent connection problems but I'm not sure the problem was ever > resolved. The problem we have seen is that when using persistent > connections the web server doesn't seen to reuse the connections or somthing > to that effect. The result being that we eventually use up our postgres > limit of 48 connections and nothing can connect to postgre anymore. It is > possible that this is a configuration problem that we haven't sufficiently > investigated, but I meniton it because I have heard other talk of this. > Anyone have more information? > I have not seen this, though now that you mention it, I will be on the lookout. We have a load balenced system with [n] apache servers, each with a local Postgres database that receives updates from a master. On the local web servers, we have done a good deal of load testing. Our apache instances are pretty persistent, i.e. we do not have a time out or maximum number of transactions. I never see more more postgres instances than I have apache instances. We are using pg_pConnect to connect to the postgres system. The behavior may differ if the database is on a different system. -- http://www.mohawksoft.com
Adam Lang wrote: > > I'd say the most important thing would be to get it upto speed with 7.1. > Make sure PHP supports large objects and the TOAST properly. What would be the problem there? As I understand TOAST, the application shouldn't take any notice of it's inner workings whatsoever . . . also, I've used TOAST with PHP (i.e. I've managed to insert more than 8 k into a row with the rowsize set to 8 k), without any trouble. I don't know about large objects but as I heard, the interface didn't change?! - Frank
Adam Lang wrote: > > I thought I saw mention on the interfaces list that the ODBC driver needed > to be modified to properly use the large objects. You normally wouldn't use ODBC to access Postgres from PHP but rather the Postgres-specific interface. You _can_ use ODBC as well but normally that doesn't provide any advantage. If your concern is database abstraction, there are several libraries for PHP that provide it in varying degrees, ODBC would be just one, possibly not optimal, solution for the problem. Generally, from following the PHP lists and looking at columns on, for instance, phpbuilder.com, PHP folks don't seem to concerned with the abstraction issue, as far as I can make out anyway (just my impression). Rasmus' question, IMHO, was about the PHP/Postgres interface, not about ODBC. - Frank
On Wed, Dec 27, 2000 at 12:56:26AM -0500, Bruce Momjian wrote: > I have been asked by the major PHP developer Rasmus Lerdorf to see if > the PostgreSQL/PHP interface needs any improvements. > > Is the current PostgreSQL interface module in PHP adequate? Does it > support all the current libpq features? > > If not, would someone submit some patches to the PHP folks. They want > us to work well with PHP. They are basically encouraging us to improve > it in any way we can. I use PHP and Postgres together quite a bit, and find the APIs complete enough for most things. However, just last week I implemented pg_lolseek($loid, $offset $whence) and pg_lotell($loid) For some stuff that we are working on. They are pretty straightforward, and I can package them up and submit them if someone wants. -- Adam Haberlach |A cat spends her life conflicted between a adam@newsnipple.com |deep, passionate, and profound desire for http://www.newsnipple.com |fish and an equally deep, passionate, and '88 EX500 |profound desire to avoid getting wet.
I have been searching without luck on a howto on how to create locales for postgres. Could somebody please point me in the general direction? Thanks. :wq Tim Uckun Due Diligence Inc. http://www.diligence.com/ Americas Background Investigation Expert. If your company isn't doing background checks, maybe you haven't considered the risks of a bad hire.
I'd say the most important thing would be to get it upto speed with 7.1. Make sure PHP supports large objects and the TOAST properly. Adam Lang Systems Engineer Rutgers Casualty Insurance Company http://www.rutgersinsurance.com ----- Original Message ----- From: "Bruce Momjian" <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us> To: "PostgreSQL-development" <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>; "PostgreSQL-interfaces" <pgsql-interfaces@postgresql.org> Sent: Wednesday, December 27, 2000 12:56 AM Subject: [INTERFACES] PHP and PostgreSQL > I have been asked by the major PHP developer Rasmus Lerdorf to see if > the PostgreSQL/PHP interface needs any improvements. > > Is the current PostgreSQL interface module in PHP adequate? Does it > support all the current libpq features? > > If not, would someone submit some patches to the PHP folks. They want > us to work well with PHP. They are basically encouraging us to improve > it in any way we can. > > -- > Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us > pgman@candle.pha.pa.us | (610) 853-3000 > + If your life is a hard drive, | 830 Blythe Avenue > + Christ can be your backup. | Drexel Hill, Pennsylvania 19026
I agree, but I figured that if the 7.1 upgrade breaks some of the large object interface in the ODBC code, it may possibly break some of the interface in the php-psql code. That's why I said it should probably be checked. ;) Adam Lang Systems Engineer Rutgers Casualty Insurance Company http://www.rutgersinsurance.com ----- Original Message ----- From: "Frank Joerdens" <frank@joerdens.de> To: "Adam Lang" <aalang@rutgersinsurance.com> Cc: "PostgreSQL-development" <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>; "PostgreSQL-interfaces" <pgsql-interfaces@postgresql.org> Sent: Wednesday, December 27, 2000 5:22 PM Subject: Re: [INTERFACES] PHP and PostgreSQL > Adam Lang wrote: > > > > I thought I saw mention on the interfaces list that the ODBC driver needed > > to be modified to properly use the large objects. > > You normally wouldn't use ODBC to access Postgres from PHP but rather > the Postgres-specific interface. You _can_ use ODBC as well but normally > that doesn't provide any advantage. If your concern is database > abstraction, there are several libraries for PHP that provide it in > varying degrees, ODBC would be just one, possibly not optimal, solution > for the problem. Generally, from following the PHP lists and looking at > columns on, for instance, phpbuilder.com, PHP folks don't seem to > concerned with the abstraction issue, as far as I can make out anyway > (just my impression). Rasmus' question, IMHO, was about the PHP/Postgres > interface, not about ODBC. > > - Frank
I thought I saw mention on the interfaces list that the ODBC driver needed to be modified to properly use the large objects. Adam Lang Systems Engineer Rutgers Casualty Insurance Company http://www.rutgersinsurance.com ----- Original Message ----- From: "Frank Joerdens" <frank@joerdens.de> To: "Adam Lang" <aalang@rutgersinsurance.com> Cc: "Bruce Momjian" <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us>; "PostgreSQL-development" <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>; "PostgreSQL-interfaces" <pgsql-interfaces@postgresql.org> Sent: Wednesday, December 27, 2000 12:03 PM Subject: Re: [INTERFACES] PHP and PostgreSQL > Adam Lang wrote: > > > > I'd say the most important thing would be to get it upto speed with 7.1. > > Make sure PHP supports large objects and the TOAST properly. > > What would be the problem there? As I understand TOAST, the application shouldn't take any > notice of it's inner workings whatsoever . . . also, I've used TOAST with PHP (i.e. I've > managed to insert more than 8 k into a row with the rowsize set to 8 k), without any > trouble. I don't know about large objects but as I heard, the interface didn't change?! > > - Frank
You do not need create locale specially for postgres. Postgres uses system locale. You could look at /usr/share/locale regards, Oleg On Wed, 27 Dec 2000, Tim Uckun wrote: > Date: Wed, 27 Dec 2000 10:18:01 -0700 > From: Tim Uckun <tim@diligence.com> > To: pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org > Subject: [HACKERS] Creating locales. > > I have been searching without luck on a howto on how to create locales for > postgres. Could somebody please point me in the general direction? Thanks. > > :wq > Tim Uckun > Due Diligence Inc. http://www.diligence.com/ Americas Background > Investigation Expert. > If your company isn't doing background checks, maybe you haven't considered > the risks of a bad hire. > _____________________________________________________________ Oleg Bartunov, sci.researcher, hostmaster of AstroNet, Sternberg Astronomical Institute, Moscow University (Russia) Internet: oleg@sai.msu.su, http://www.sai.msu.su/~megera/ phone: +007(095)939-16-83, +007(095)939-23-83
Tim Uckun wrote: > > I have been searching without luck on a howto on how to create locales for > postgres. Could somebody please point me in the general direction? Thanks. > PostgreSQL uses system locales (even to the extent that I was unable to get it use any other locale by setting LC_* variables in /etc/init.d/rc.d/postgres) I did have to modify my locale (et_EE) to _not_ group \xff (ÿaut;) with other y-s but to sort it after all other "standard" chars to work properly with LIKE optimisations. Perhaps the right approach would be to leave \xff alone and to choose some character in the 128-159 range for bigger-than-any-other-char but as \xff is not used in estonian i was able to do away with just moving it. OTOH, it may be a good idea to start a repository for locales that are specifilally modified to work well with postgres. We may want to move the locale stuff inside the backend someday as mandated by SQL standards and then some work would be already done. -------- Hannu
Yes, please send them over to the PHP folks. Thanks. > On Wed, Dec 27, 2000 at 12:56:26AM -0500, Bruce Momjian wrote: > > I have been asked by the major PHP developer Rasmus Lerdorf to see if > > the PostgreSQL/PHP interface needs any improvements. > > > > Is the current PostgreSQL interface module in PHP adequate? Does it > > support all the current libpq features? > > > > If not, would someone submit some patches to the PHP folks. They want > > us to work well with PHP. They are basically encouraging us to improve > > it in any way we can. > > I use PHP and Postgres together quite a bit, and find the APIs > complete enough for most things. However, just last week I implemented > > pg_lolseek($loid, $offset $whence) > and > pg_lotell($loid) > > For some stuff that we are working on. They are pretty straightforward, > and I can package them up and submit them if someone wants. > > -- > Adam Haberlach |A cat spends her life conflicted between a > adam@newsnipple.com |deep, passionate, and profound desire for > http://www.newsnipple.com |fish and an equally deep, passionate, and > '88 EX500 |profound desire to avoid getting wet. > -- Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us pgman@candle.pha.pa.us | (610) 853-3000+ If your life is a hard drive, | 830 Blythe Avenue + Christ can be your backup. | Drexel Hill, Pennsylvania19026
This is interesting. I always wondered how the persistent connection
stuff handled this, and not I see that it doesn't.
[ Charset ISO-8859-1 unsupported, converting... ]
> > The only problem we have run into (and I have heard of others having this
> > problem also) is with persistent connections. I have seen discussion on
> > persistent connection problems but I'm not sure the problem was ever
> > resolved. The problem we have seen is that when using persistent
> > connections the web server doesn't seen to reuse the connections or
> somthing
> > to that effect. The result being that we eventually use up our postgres
> > limit of 48 connections and nothing can connect to postgre anymore. It is
> > possible that this is a configuration problem that we haven't sufficiently
> > investigated, but I meniton it because I have heard other talk of this.
> > Anyone have more information?
>
> The *real* problem with persistent connections is:
>
> Script1: BEGIN;
> Script1: UPDATE table set row = 'things';
> Script2: Insert into table (id) values ('bad data');
> Script1: COMMIT;
>
> Since script2 managed to do a BAD insert in the middle of script1's
> transaction, the transaction in script1 fails. Obvious solution? Don't do
> connection sharing when a transaction is enabled. The whole persistent
> connection thing is only valid for mysql as it's the only thing that doesn't
> really support transactions (and even thats partially changed).
>
> They need to look for stuff going through (keywords like BEGIN) and 'lock'
> that connection to the single entity that opened it.
>
> It's much easier to write your own. I wrote a few functions like:
>
> get_connection('DB PARMS');
> begin_transaction();
>
> commit_transaction();
> close_connection();
>
> All of this is done in a class which has knowledge of all connections that a
> script is currently using. Beginning a transaction locks down the
> connection from use by any other handler, they're all bumped to another one.
> Problem? It requires atleast 1 connection per page, but since they're
> actually dropped at close it's not so bad.
>
>
-- Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us pgman@candle.pha.pa.us | (610)
853-3000+ If your life is a hard drive, | 830 Blythe Avenue + Christ can be your backup. | Drexel Hill,
Pennsylvania19026
It was obviously designed with MySQL's "Nobody needs transactions for
webwork" type of situation in mind.
> This is interesting. I always wondered how the persistent connection
> stuff handled this, and not I see that it doesn't.
>
> [ Charset ISO-8859-1 unsupported, converting... ]
> > > The only problem we have run into (and I have heard of others having
this
> > > problem also) is with persistent connections. I have seen discussion
on
> > > persistent connection problems but I'm not sure the problem was ever
> > > resolved. The problem we have seen is that when using persistent
> > > connections the web server doesn't seen to reuse the connections or
> > somthing
> > > to that effect. The result being that we eventually use up our
postgres
> > > limit of 48 connections and nothing can connect to postgre anymore.
It is
> > > possible that this is a configuration problem that we haven't
sufficiently
> > > investigated, but I meniton it because I have heard other talk of
this.
> > > Anyone have more information?
> >
> > The *real* problem with persistent connections is:
> >
> > Script1: BEGIN;
> > Script1: UPDATE table set row = 'things';
> > Script2: Insert into table (id) values ('bad data');
> > Script1: COMMIT;
> >
> > Since script2 managed to do a BAD insert in the middle of script1's
> > transaction, the transaction in script1 fails. Obvious solution? Don't
do
> > connection sharing when a transaction is enabled. The whole persistent
> > connection thing is only valid for mysql as it's the only thing that
doesn't
> > really support transactions (and even thats partially changed).
> >
> > They need to look for stuff going through (keywords like BEGIN) and
'lock'
> > that connection to the single entity that opened it.
> >
> > It's much easier to write your own. I wrote a few functions like:
> >
> > get_connection('DB PARMS');
> > begin_transaction();
> >
> > commit_transaction();
> > close_connection();
> >
> > All of this is done in a class which has knowledge of all connections
that a
> > script is currently using. Beginning a transaction locks down the
> > connection from use by any other handler, they're all bumped to another
one.
> > Problem? It requires atleast 1 connection per page, but since they're
> > actually dropped at close it's not so bad.
> >
> >
>
>
> --
> Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us
> pgman@candle.pha.pa.us | (610) 853-3000
> + If your life is a hard drive, | 830 Blythe Avenue
> + Christ can be your backup. | Drexel Hill, Pennsylvania 19026
>
At my work we were happily cruising along using PHP/Postgres persistent
connections. This was all happy until we installed Phorum. Phorum has its
own database abstraction layer, quite separate to all our own database
classes.
Now what happens is if someone browses the phorums for a little while, and
then switches to pages that use our own db classes, you get random slowdowns
(ie. a select occurs, and then times out after 2 mins or so).
If you use psql, and perform the select you get a 'shared memory corruption'
and 'timed out waiting for lock' errors.
Our basic theory is that somehow locks aren't being properly released by
phorum, or the connection pooling is stuffed - although Phorum doesn't use
the LOCK or BEGIN/COMMIT commands. Actually, we did notice that Phorum
issues a COMMIT whenever it closes a connection, even tho it never issues a
BEGIN. If we avoid running any Phorum scripts - no problems occur.
In an attempt to fix the problem, we configured phplib and Phorum to use
non-persistent postgresql connections. This worked fine, until now we have
a particular script, no different to the rest, that cannot acquire a
connection - it just gets an invalid resource handle. We switched phplib
back to persistent connections, and it works fine again - nothing else was
changed!
So my advice to the PHP people is to just fix Postgres connection handling!
Chris
> -----Original Message-----
> From: pgsql-hackers-owner@postgresql.org
> [mailto:pgsql-hackers-owner@postgresql.org]On Behalf Of Bruce Momjian
> Sent: Tuesday, January 02, 2001 11:58 AM
> To: Rod Taylor
> Cc: pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
> Subject: Re: [HACKERS] PHP and PostgreSQL
>
>
> This is interesting. I always wondered how the persistent connection
> stuff handled this, and not I see that it doesn't.
>
> [ Charset ISO-8859-1 unsupported, converting... ]
> > > The only problem we have run into (and I have heard of others
> having this
> > > problem also) is with persistent connections. I have seen
> discussion on
> > > persistent connection problems but I'm not sure the problem was ever
> > > resolved. The problem we have seen is that when using persistent
> > > connections the web server doesn't seen to reuse the connections or
> > somthing
> > > to that effect. The result being that we eventually use up
> our postgres
> > > limit of 48 connections and nothing can connect to postgre
> anymore. It is
> > > possible that this is a configuration problem that we haven't
> sufficiently
> > > investigated, but I meniton it because I have heard other
> talk of this.
> > > Anyone have more information?
> >
> > The *real* problem with persistent connections is:
> >
> > Script1: BEGIN;
> > Script1: UPDATE table set row = 'things';
> > Script2: Insert into table (id) values ('bad data');
> > Script1: COMMIT;
> >
> > Since script2 managed to do a BAD insert in the middle of script1's
> > transaction, the transaction in script1 fails. Obvious
> solution? Don't do
> > connection sharing when a transaction is enabled. The whole persistent
> > connection thing is only valid for mysql as it's the only thing
> that doesn't
> > really support transactions (and even thats partially changed).
> >
> > They need to look for stuff going through (keywords like BEGIN)
> and 'lock'
> > that connection to the single entity that opened it.
> >
> > It's much easier to write your own. I wrote a few functions like:
> >
> > get_connection('DB PARMS');
> > begin_transaction();
> >
> > commit_transaction();
> > close_connection();
> >
> > All of this is done in a class which has knowledge of all
> connections that a
> > script is currently using. Beginning a transaction locks down the
> > connection from use by any other handler, they're all bumped to
> another one.
> > Problem? It requires atleast 1 connection per page, but since they're
> > actually dropped at close it's not so bad.
> >
> >
>
>
> --
> Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us
> pgman@candle.pha.pa.us | (610) 853-3000
> + If your life is a hard drive, | 830 Blythe Avenue
> + Christ can be your backup. | Drexel Hill, Pennsylvania 19026
>
"Christopher Kings-Lynne" <chriskl@familyhealth.com.au> writes:
> Now what happens is if someone browses the phorums for a little while, and
> then switches to pages that use our own db classes, you get random slowdowns
> (ie. a select occurs, and then times out after 2 mins or so).
> If you use psql, and perform the select you get a 'shared memory corruption'
> and 'timed out waiting for lock' errors.
Ugh. We would like to think that client misbehavior couldn't cause such
things. Can you dig into this some more, and provide further details on
what is happening and what the sequence of client requests is?
regards, tom lane
Would to send this over to the PHP folks for inclusion? Thanks. > On Wed, Dec 27, 2000 at 12:56:26AM -0500, Bruce Momjian wrote: > > I have been asked by the major PHP developer Rasmus Lerdorf to see if > > the PostgreSQL/PHP interface needs any improvements. > > > > Is the current PostgreSQL interface module in PHP adequate? Does it > > support all the current libpq features? > > > > If not, would someone submit some patches to the PHP folks. They want > > us to work well with PHP. They are basically encouraging us to improve > > it in any way we can. > > I use PHP and Postgres together quite a bit, and find the APIs > complete enough for most things. However, just last week I implemented > > pg_lolseek($loid, $offset $whence) > and > pg_lotell($loid) > > For some stuff that we are working on. They are pretty straightforward, > and I can package them up and submit them if someone wants. > > -- > Adam Haberlach |A cat spends her life conflicted between a > adam@newsnipple.com |deep, passionate, and profound desire for > http://www.newsnipple.com |fish and an equally deep, passionate, and > '88 EX500 |profound desire to avoid getting wet. > -- Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us pgman@candle.pha.pa.us | (610) 853-3000+ If your life is a hard drive, | 830 Blythe Avenue + Christ can be your backup. | Drexel Hill, Pennsylvania19026
On Mon, Jan 22, 2001 at 11:55:56PM -0500, Bruce Momjian wrote: > > On Wed, Dec 27, 2000 at 12:56:26AM -0500, Bruce Momjian wrote: > > > I have been asked by the major PHP developer Rasmus Lerdorf to see if > > > the PostgreSQL/PHP interface needs any improvements. > > > > > > Is the current PostgreSQL interface module in PHP adequate? Does it > > > support all the current libpq features? > > > > > > If not, would someone submit some patches to the PHP folks. They want > > > us to work well with PHP. They are basically encouraging us to improve > > > it in any way we can. > > > > I use PHP and Postgres together quite a bit, and find the APIs > > complete enough for most things. However, just last week I implemented > > > > pg_lolseek($loid, $offset $whence) > > and > > pg_lotell($loid) > > > > For some stuff that we are working on. They are pretty straightforward, > > and I can package them up and submit them if someone wants. > > > Would to send this over to the PHP folks for inclusion? Thanks. I sent them patches against the at-the-time up-to-date CVS tree back when this first came up, they said that they failed, so I sent them another set, and have not heard back from them. It doesn't seem to show up in the cvs logs. I'll bug someone again and see if I can find out what happened. I mean, they only have 240 people with write access to the cvs tree... -- Adam Haberlach |A cat spends her life conflicted between a adam@newsnipple.com |deep, passionate, and profound desire for http://www.newsnipple.com |fish and an equally deep, passionate, and '88 EX500 |profound desire to avoid getting wet.