From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
To: Bruce Badger <bruce_badger@badgerse.com>
Cc: pgsql-interfaces@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] More thoughts about FE/BE protocol
Date: Thu, 10 Apr 2003 22:54:41 -0400
Message-ID: <8557.1050029681@sss.pgh.pa.us> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1050027702.3103.59.camel@alice>
References: <10478.1049927451@sss.pgh.pa.us>
<3E95A3CD.9080500@xythos.com>
<5564.1049998513@sss.pgh.pa.us>
<1050012887.1063.12.camel@alice>
<7705.1050017370@sss.pgh.pa.us>
<1050027702.3103.59.camel@alice>
Bruce Badger <bruce_badger@badgerse.com> writes:
> On Fri, 2003-04-11 at 09:29, Tom Lane wrote:
>> I'm not planning to change the contents of messages more than I have to.
>> What's so hard about parsing "UPDATE nnn" ?
> Nothing, of course. However the fewer easy things we *have* to do, the
> more other things we have time for.
The other side of that coin is that making low-value changes takes time
away from dealing with the important problems. We're not working in a
green field here --- we have existing code that we're planning to change.
> Also, some things that could return
> a row count don't, e.g. SELECT.
But the client has surely already accumulated a row count while
collecting the SELECT result. Doesn't seem like there's much
value-added to be found there.
regards, tom lane
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: tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us, bruce_badger@badgerse.com
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] More thoughts about FE/BE protocol
In-Reply-To: <8557.1050029681@sss.pgh.pa.us>
* 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