On Sat, Nov 20, 2010 at 2:04 AM, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > Alvaro Herrera <alvhe...@commandprompt.com> writes: >> Excerpts from Tom Lane's message of vie nov 19 12:25:13 -0300 2010: >>> Yeah. You're adding a new fundamental state to the protocol; it's not >>> enough to bury that in the description of a message format. I don't >>> think a whole lot of new verbiage is needed, but the COPY section needs >>> to point out that this is a different state that allows both send and >>> receive, and explain what the conditions are for getting into and out of >>> that state. > >> Is it sane that the new message has so specific a name? > > Yeah, it might be better to call it something generic like CopyBoth.
Thanks for the review! The attached patch s/CopyXLog/CopyBoth/g and adds the description about CopyBoth into the COPY section. While modifying the code, it occurred to me that we might have to add new ExecStatusType like PGRES_COPY_BOTH and use that for CopyBoth mode, for the sake of consistency. But since it's just alias of PGRES_COPY_BOTH for now, i.e., there is no specific behavior for that ExecStatusType, I don't think that it's worth adding that yet. Regards, -- Fujii Masao NIPPON TELEGRAPH AND TELEPHONE CORPORATION NTT Open Source Software Center
libpqrcv_send_v3.patch
Description: Binary data
-- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
