Marko Kreen <mark...@gmail.com> writes: > On Mon, Jul 16, 2012 at 4:33 PM, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: >> Mm. I still think we should drop it, because it's still a dangerous API >> that's not necessary for the principal benefit of this feature.
> Yes, it is a secondary feature, but it fits the needs of the actual target > audience of the single-row feature - various high-level wrappers of libpq. > Also it is needed for high-performance situations, where the > single-row-mode fits well even for C clients, except the > advantage is negated by new malloc-per-row overhead. Absolutely no evidence has been presented that there's any useful performance gain to be had there. Moreover, if there were, we could probably work a bit harder at making PGresult creation cheaper, rather than having to expose a dangerous API. regards, tom lane -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (firstname.lastname@example.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers