On Fri, Dec 6, 2013 at 04:04:36PM +0100, Andres Freund wrote: > On 2013-12-05 23:01:28 +0200, Heikki Linnakangas wrote: > > On 12/05/2013 10:37 PM, Robert Haas wrote: > > >On Thu, Dec 5, 2013 at 3:05 PM, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > > >>It might be unpleasant to use in some cases, though. > > > > > >Why would there be more than a few cases in the first place? Who is > > >going to use this beyond psql, pg_dump(all), and pg_upgrade, and why? > > > > Well, you might want to use pgAdmin, or your other favorite admin tool. I'm > > not sure how well it would work, and I think it's OK if we say "sorry, can't > > do that", but it's not a crazy thing to want. > > Pgadmin wouldn't work, it uses multiple connections for anything but the > most trivial tasks. You can't even send a manual sql query using only > one connection. > I think that's true for most of the non-trivial tools.
FYI, pg_upgrade in parallel mode needs multiple database connections too. -- Bruce Momjian <br...@momjian.us> http://momjian.us EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com + Everyone has their own god. + -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
