From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
To: Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us>
Cc: Volkan YAZICI <yazicivo@ttnet.net.tr>
Cc: pgsql-interfaces@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: PQfformat() and Composite Formatted Results
Date: Fri, 03 Feb 2006 21:25:21 -0500
Message-ID: <15245.1139019921@sss.pgh.pa.us> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <200602040035.k140ZcR22936@candle.pha.pa.us>
References: <200602040035.k140ZcR22936@candle.pha.pa.us>
Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us> writes:
> Tom Lane wrote:
>> There is 0 chance that this will be applied, because
>>
>>> Therefore, it breaks compatibility with the existing PQ*Params() and
>>> PQ*Prepared() functions. (Use at your own risk.)
> OK, patch removed, but you stated in email:
>> On Dec 30 06:52, Tom Lane wrote:
> It's not a protocol restriction, it's a libpq restriction made in the
> name of keeping the API from getting too unwieldy. We could add more
> entry points with different parameter lists to address this. I have
> a feeling that refactoring the API of the query functions entirely
> might be a better idea, though.
> so I thought you were saying that we need to just pick new function
> names or something.
I didn't say we couldn't do something involving new function names;
I said *this* patch isn't acceptable ...
regards, tom lane
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Reply to all the recipients using the --to and --cc options:
reply via email
To: pgsql-interfaces@postgresql.org
Cc: tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us, pgman@candle.pha.pa.us, yazicivo@ttnet.net.tr
Subject: Re: PQfformat() and Composite Formatted Results
In-Reply-To: <15245.1139019921@sss.pgh.pa.us>
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
This inbox is served by DDX for PostgreSQL; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox