Received: from sss.pgh.pa.us (sss.pgh.pa.us [209.114.132.154]) by mail.postgresql.org (8.11.1/8.11.1) with ESMTP id eBRHArL31382 for ; Wed, 27 Dec 2000 12:10:53 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us) Received: from sss2.sss.pgh.pa.us (tgl@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by sss.pgh.pa.us (8.11.1/8.11.1) with ESMTP id eBRHB8C07698; Wed, 27 Dec 2000 12:11:08 -0500 (EST) To: "Tim Barnard" cc: pgsql-interfaces@postgresql.org Subject: Re: PQsetnonblocking questions In-reply-to: <002201c07022$fa575400$32e85ecc@hartcomm.com> References: <002201c07022$fa575400$32e85ecc@hartcomm.com> Comments: In-reply-to "Tim Barnard" message dated "Wed, 27 Dec 2000 08:35:09 -0800" Date: Wed, 27 Dec 2000 12:11:08 -0500 Message-ID: <7695.977937068@sss.pgh.pa.us> From: Tom Lane X-Archive-Number: 200012/228 X-Sequence-Number: 574 "Tim Barnard" writes: > ... do I even need to use PQsetnonblocking? Not unless you are unhappy about the possibility of short-term blocking during PQsendQuery (which is a very remote possibility anyway, unless you send huge query strings). I believe that the nonblocking-mode code is pretty buggy, and don't recommend using it unless you really need it and want to help debug it... regards, tom lane