-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Tue, Apr 15, 2008 at 10:57:37AM -0400, Merlin Moncure wrote:
On Tue, Apr 15, 2008 at 10:48 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Tue, Apr 15, 2008 at 09:48:37AM -0400, Merlin Moncure wrote:
On Tue, Apr 15, 2008 at 9:36 AM, Alvaro Herrera
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I expect you intend to get at least the hooks in, right?
[...]
libpqtypes was designed to handle this with our without hooking. (the
'hooking' debate was mainly about exactly how libpq and libpqtypes was
going to be separated).
libpqtypes had a superclassing
This patch has been lingering around since Aug 2007. It has matured a
lot and now calls libpq home. Unfortunately, ISTM that there is limited
support for our proposal. We either pitched to the wrong crowd or
pqtypes doesn't have the mass appeal we expected. With that said, we
are
Andrew Chernow escribió:
This patch has been lingering around since Aug 2007. It has matured a
lot and now calls libpq home. Unfortunately, ISTM that there is limited
support for our proposal. We either pitched to the wrong crowd or
pqtypes doesn't have the mass appeal we expected.
On Tue, Apr 15, 2008 at 9:36 AM, Alvaro Herrera
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Andrew Chernow escribió:
This patch has been lingering around since Aug 2007. It has matured a
lot and now calls libpq home. Unfortunately, ISTM that there is limited
support for our proposal. We either pitched
Alvaro Herrera wrote:
Andrew Chernow escribi?:
This patch has been lingering around since Aug 2007. It has matured a
lot and now calls libpq home. Unfortunately, ISTM that there is limited
support for our proposal. We either pitched to the wrong crowd or
pqtypes doesn't have
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Tue, Apr 15, 2008 at 09:48:37AM -0400, Merlin Moncure wrote:
On Tue, Apr 15, 2008 at 9:36 AM, Alvaro Herrera
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
[...]
I expect you intend to get at least the hooks in, right?
not likely. Keep in mind, this is not
On Tue, Apr 15, 2008 at 10:48 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Tue, Apr 15, 2008 at 09:48:37AM -0400, Merlin Moncure wrote:
On Tue, Apr 15, 2008 at 9:36 AM, Alvaro Herrera
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I expect you intend to get at least the hooks in, right?
not likely. Keep in
Merlin Moncure wrote:
On Tue, Apr 15, 2008 at 10:48 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Tue, Apr 15, 2008 at 09:48:37AM -0400, Merlin Moncure wrote:
On Tue, Apr 15, 2008 at 9:36 AM, Alvaro Herrera
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I expect you intend to get at least the hooks in, right?
not
On Tue, Apr 15, 2008 at 11:24:43AM -0400, Andrew Chernow wrote:
libpqtypes had a superclassing concept (not much discussed on the
lists) where you could introduce new type handlers that wrapped
existing ones and was desgined exactly for things like this. keep an
eye on our upcoming pgfoundry
Martijn van Oosterhout wrote:
On Tue, Apr 15, 2008 at 11:24:43AM -0400, Andrew Chernow wrote:
libpqtypes had a superclassing concept (not much discussed on the
lists) where you could introduce new type handlers that wrapped
existing ones and was desgined exactly for things like this. keep an
Andrew Chernow escribió:
Maybe we'll get enough support in the future to get our stubs into core.
Until then, you'll have to patch libpq. We plan to provide binary
patches for the major platforms. You won't have to patch the guts of
pqtypes though because that is dynamically loaded
On Tue, Apr 15, 2008 at 11:51 AM, Alvaro Herrera
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Andrew Chernow escribió:
Maybe we'll get enough support in the future to get our stubs into core.
Until then, you'll have to patch libpq. We plan to provide binary
patches for the major platforms. You won't have
Merlin Moncure wrote:
For posterity, here are our objections to hooking libpq:
*) Is there any other plausible scenario of another use for hooking
into libpq events? (this is rhetorical...we don't think there is.) We
think that there is a better way to integrate libpqtypes with libpq so
maybe
Andrew Chernow [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Installing it per-conn doesn't get you anything. pqtypes has already
been linked in. If you use PQexec and PQgetvalue, the pqtypes code
pretty much does nothing. So, a per-conn install seems redundant. You
are installing the same function
Tom Lane wrote:
Andrew Chernow [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Installing it per-conn doesn't get you anything. pqtypes has already
been linked in. If you use PQexec and PQgetvalue, the pqtypes code
pretty much does nothing. So, a per-conn install seems redundant. You
are installing the same
On Tue, Apr 15, 2008 at 3:13 PM, Andrew Chernow [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Tom Lane wrote:
Andrew Chernow [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Installing it per-conn doesn't get you anything. pqtypes has already
been linked in. If you use PQexec and PQgetvalue, the pqtypes code pretty
much does
Merlin Moncure wrote:
Maybe if there was PQinitGlobalHooks so that all PGconn structs
created would inherit the hooks automatically...this allows per conn
initialization (if desired) and global initialization which is often
easier. As I understand this, no locking is required, except the init
18 matches
Mail list logo
