X-Original-To: pgsql-interfaces-postgresql.org@localhost.postgresql.org Received: from localhost (unknown [200.46.204.2]) by svr1.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CC92AD1B527 for ; Wed, 19 Nov 2003 00:01:06 +0000 (GMT) Received: from svr1.postgresql.org ([200.46.204.71]) by localhost (neptune.hub.org [200.46.204.2]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 42975-02 for ; Tue, 18 Nov 2003 20:00:37 -0400 (AST) Received: from cpc-gw2.cpc.net.au (unknown [210.9.248.93]) by svr1.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 06AD0D1C991 for ; Tue, 18 Nov 2003 20:00:33 -0400 (AST) Received: from utiba.com (ser1.cpc.net.au [192.168.0.19]) by Utiba Mail Gateway (2.2.2) with ESMTP id hAJ00b812344 for ; Wed, 19 Nov 2003 11:00:37 +1100 Received: from pc37.cpc.net.au (pc37.cpc.net.au [192.168.0.37]) by Utiba Mail Thingy (0.0.2) with ESMTP id hAJ00Z612644 for ; Wed, 19 Nov 2003 11:00:35 +1100 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" From: Philip Yarra Organization: Utiba Pty Ltd Subject: quick ECPG doco change Date: Wed, 19 Nov 2003 11:00:34 +1100 User-Agent: KMail/1.4.3 To: pgsql-interfaces@postgresql.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <200311191100.34246.philip@utiba.com> X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at postgresql.org X-Archive-Number: 200311/32 X-Sequence-Number: 4590 Hi, this doco patch is a quick one to add explicit mention of the need for = the=20 AT clause in threaded ECPG applications. Does this sound okay? Bruce, yes, I do intend to contribute more than this, but at least this will stop some confusion in the meantime. Regards, Philip Yarra. Index: ecpg.sgml =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D RCS file: /projects/cvsroot/pgsql-server/doc/src/sgml/ecpg.sgml,v retrieving revision 1.54 diff -c -r1.54 ecpg.sgml *** ecpg.sgml 12 Nov 2003 22:47:47 -0000 1.54 --- ecpg.sgml 18 Nov 2003 23:20:51 -0000 *************** *** 353,358 **** --- 353,365 ---- This option is particularly suitable if the application needs to use several connections in mixed order. + + + + If your application uses multiple threads of execution, they cannot share a + connection concurrently. You must either explicitly control access = to the connection + (using mutexes) or use a connection for each thread. If each thread uses its own connection, + you will need to use the AT clause to specify which connection the thread will use. -------------------------------------------------------