Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:

> Is this something people are interested in?  I am thinking no based on
> the lack of requests and the size of the patch.

Lack of requests? I was actually surprised by how enthusiastically people
reacted to it.

However I don't think the patch as is is ready to be committed. Aside from
missing documentation and regression tests it was only intended to be a
proof-of-concept and to be useful for specific tests I was doing.

I did try to do a decent job, I got \timing and server-tracked variables like
encoding. But I need to go back through the code and make sure there are no
other details like that.

It would be nice to get feedback from other developers from looking at the
patch to confirm that there aren't more fundamental problems with the approach
and how it uses libpq before I go through the effort of cleaning up the

  Gregory Stark

---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 1: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate
       subscribe-nomail command to [EMAIL PROTECTED] so that your
       message can get through to the mailing list cleanly

Reply via email to