On Wednesday 22 February 2006 07:26, you wrote: > On Wed, 2006-02-22 at 05:51 +0000, Nick Kew wrote: > > If a pool is needed, it should be simple enough to make it a member of > > the apr_dbd_results_t struct. But since get_row at the same level of the > > API has a pool argument, I agree your proposal looks like the best > > solution. > > Cool. I'll work on that. > > I also noticed that some of the patches I sent regarding this may be a > bit naive, especially for async queries, so I try to rework and resend.
:-) I haven't found time to review them yet - don't know if anyone else has. But async queries shouldn't be an issue here AFAICS. Keep bugging us! -- Nick Kew
