X-Original-To: pgsql-interfaces-postgresql.org@localhost.postgresql.org Received: from localhost (av.hub.org [200.46.204.144]) by svr1.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 69169DAD1C for ; Thu, 10 Nov 2005 13:09:58 -0400 (AST) Received: from svr1.postgresql.org ([200.46.204.71]) by localhost (av.hub.org [200.46.204.144]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 00390-08 for ; Thu, 10 Nov 2005 17:09:56 +0000 (GMT) X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey- Received: from gatefox.foxi.nl (foxi.xs4all.nl [194.109.246.192]) by svr1.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 77D4CDAC4B for ; Thu, 10 Nov 2005 13:09:56 -0400 (AST) Received: from techfox.foxi (techfox.foxi [192.168.0.79]) by gatefox.foxi.nl (8.13.3/8.13.3) with ESMTP id jAAH9tir016966; Thu, 10 Nov 2005 18:09:55 +0100 From: Frank van Vugt Organization: Foxi Consultants in Technology BV To: Tom Lane Subject: Re: Incremental results from libpq Date: Thu, 10 Nov 2005 18:09:54 +0100 User-Agent: KMail/1.8 References: <4D426B54-E08F-4DE9-9776-D46610CA4968@slamb.org> <200511101751.55377.ftm.van.vugt@foxi.nl> <9994.1131642192@sss.pgh.pa.us> In-Reply-To: <9994.1131642192@sss.pgh.pa.us> Cc: pgsql-interfaces@postgresql.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200511101809.55139.ftm.van.vugt@foxi.nl> X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at hub.org X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.039 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.039] X-Spam-Score: 0.039 X-Spam-Level: X-Archive-Number: 200511/17 X-Sequence-Number: 5813 > There are lots of possibilities, but one fairly obvious example is Got it, thanks. So if the the Oracle part is true, I guess this is a winner for PostgreSQL ;) -- Best, Frank.