From: pgsql-interfaces@commandprompt.com
To: jtv <jtv@xs4all.nl>
Cc: pgsql-interfaces@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: libpq++ in Apache Problem.
Date: Tue, 5 Jun 2001 11:17:06 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.30.0106051107020.5679-100000@commandprompt.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20010531173347.C29317@xs4all.nl>
On Thu, 31 May 2001, jtv wrote:
>On Tue, May 29, 2001 at 07:42:46AM -0700, pgsql-interfaces@commandprompt.com wrote:
>>The next step in trouble-shooting this I suppose is to build the dummy
>>Apache module with libpq++ and see if it the same behavior is exhibited.
>>If not, it's got to be something deeper in the core of my module.
>Have you tried using just libpq, and just "inlining" the code that libpq++
>*should* be executing based on your invocations? Sounds like you don't even
>need the PQresult structure to reproduce the problem, so it should be doable.
Unfortunately, this is a kind of at a deep level in an application
utilizing libpq++, and it'd be somewhat nightmarish to refactor all the
libpq++ code into procedural libpq.
Theoretically I could use libpq for this one function, since my other
libpq++ objects live and die correctly with the httpd process, and have
the two different APIs co-existing, it's just not ideal.
Moreover, I want to know WHY this is happening! ;) This is truly bizarre.
Jw.
--
jlx@commandprompt.com by way of pgsql-interfaces@commandprompt.com
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: pgsql-interfaces@commandprompt.com, jtv@xs4all.nl
Subject: Re: libpq++ in Apache Problem.
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.30.0106051107020.5679-100000@commandprompt.com>
* 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