From: Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net>
To: pgsql-interfaces@postgresql.org
Cc: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Cc: Scott Lamb <slamb@slamb.org>
Subject: Re: Incremental results from libpq
Date: Wed, 16 Nov 2005 10:34:58 +0100
Message-ID: <200511161034.58561.peter_e@gmx.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <19391.1131571328@sss.pgh.pa.us>
References: <4D426B54-E08F-4DE9-9776-D46610CA4968@slamb.org>
<19391.1131571328@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Am Mittwoch, 9. November 2005 22:22 schrieb Tom Lane:
> The main reason why libpq does what it does is that this way we do not
> have to expose in the API the notion of a command that fails part way
> through.
I'm at LinuxWorld Frankfurt and one of the Trolltech guys came over to talk to
me about this. He opined that it would be beneficial for their purpose (in
certain cases) if the server would first compute the entire result set and
keep it in the server memory (thus eliminating potential errors of the 1/x
kind) and then ship it to the client in a way that the client would be able
to fetch it piecewise. Then, the client application could build the display
incrementally while the rest of the result set travels over the (slow) link.
Does that make sense?
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: peter_e@gmx.net, tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us, slamb@slamb.org
Subject: Re: Incremental results from libpq
In-Reply-To: <200511161034.58561.peter_e@gmx.net>
* 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