On Mon, 2007-12-10 at 15:00 -0500, Mathieu Bouchard wrote: > On Mon, 10 Dec 2007, Jamie Bullock wrote: > > > Fair enough, I think I was probably stretching the point about using the > > [psql]-style of database connectivity requiring less objects. > > However, it's perfectly possible to have multiple [psql] instances > > connected to the same database, so the routing problem is a bit of a > > moot point. > > But it requires multiple logins, perhaps many at once, which might be > wasteful.
Not especially. > For sharing database connections between several [psql] > objects, what do you think would be the best ways to do it? This is > supposing that several different database connections can still be > used at once, as specified in the patches. > I think this is a less trivial problem than it might appear. Having a global pointer representing the database connection seems dangerous and a bit naive. Perhaps some kind of callback-based mechanism between the database connection 'server' object and the 'client' query objects would be the way to go. Jamie -- www.postlude.co.uk _______________________________________________ [email protected] mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
