On Tue, Feb 14, 2017 at 12:11 AM, Michael Paquier <michael.paqu...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Thu, Feb 2, 2017 at 3:01 PM, Higuchi, Daisuke > <higuchi.dais...@jp.fujitsu.com> wrote: >> From: Michael Paquier [mailto:michael.paqu...@gmail.com] >>>This has not been added yet to the next CF. As Ashutosh mentioned >>>things tend to be easily forgotten. So I have added it here: >>>https://commitfest.postgresql.org/13/982/ >> Thank you for adding this problem to CF. > > I have added this thread to the list of open items for PG10: > https://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/PostgreSQL_10_Open_Items
Good catch, Michael. I think the patch as presented probably isn't quite what we want, because it waits synchronously for the second result to be ready. Note that the wait for the first result is asynchronous: we check PQisBusy and return without progressing the state machine until the latter returns false; only then do we call PQgetResult(). But the typo fix is of course correct, and independent. Committed that. -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
