X-Original-To: pgsql-interfaces-postgresql.org@localhost.postgresql.org Received: from localhost (neptune.hub.org [200.46.204.2]) by svr1.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 96699D1B464 for ; Fri, 5 Dec 2003 07:13:38 +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 99698-08 for ; Fri, 5 Dec 2003 03:13:08 -0400 (AST) Received: from moutng.kundenserver.de (moutng.kundenserver.de [212.227.126.186]) by svr1.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 46C26D1B46D for ; Fri, 5 Dec 2003 03:13:06 -0400 (AST) Received: from [212.227.126.160] (helo=mrelayng.kundenserver.de) by moutng.kundenserver.de with esmtp (Exim 3.35 #1) id 1ASA99-0003lM-00; Fri, 05 Dec 2003 08:13:03 +0100 Received: from [80.142.157.128] (helo=fam-meskes.de) by mrelayng.kundenserver.de with asmtp (Exim 3.35 #1) id 1ASA98-0007D9-00; Fri, 05 Dec 2003 08:13:03 +0100 Received: by fam-meskes.de (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 17F6710EF8C; Fri, 5 Dec 2003 08:12:59 +0100 (CET) Date: Fri, 5 Dec 2003 08:12:59 +0100 From: Michael Meskes To: Philip Yarra Cc: Demetres Pantermalis , pgsql-interfaces@postgresql.org Subject: Re: Possible bug in ECPGlib thread-safety (Postgres 7.4)... Message-ID: <20031205071259.GA6442@feivel.fam-meskes.de> Mail-Followup-To: Philip Yarra , Demetres Pantermalis , pgsql-interfaces@postgresql.org References: <200312050944.19240.philip@utiba.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <200312050944.19240.philip@utiba.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.4i X-Provags-ID: kundenserver.de abuse@kundenserver.de auth:da5cff6069dd6897c77170232368d0ba X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at postgresql.org X-Archive-Number: 200312/17 X-Sequence-Number: 4626 On Fri, Dec 05, 2003 at 09:44:19AM +1100, Philip Yarra wrote: > The reason for this is below (I'm going from memory here, if I get this wrong > can someone correct me please?) > ... > I'm pretty sure what happens when you issue EXEC SQL SET CONNECTION is that it > sets the the default connection, so each of your threads would simply have > shuffled the default connection. Then when each thread attempts to EXEC SQL > they grab the same connection... whichever connection was made the default by > the last thread to issue EXEC SQL SET CONNECTION. This is correct. SET CONNECTION just defines the default. Michael -- Michael Meskes Email: Michael at Fam-Meskes dot De ICQ: 179140304, AIM/Yahoo: michaelmeskes, Jabber: meskes@jabber.org Go SF 49ers! Go Rhein Fire! Use Debian GNU/Linux! Use PostgreSQL!