On Mon, Sep 21, 2020 at 3:39 PM Dave Cramer <davecramer@postgres.rocks> wrote: > > > > On Mon, 21 Sep 2020 at 09:21, Matthieu Garrigues > <matthieu.garrig...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> Matthieu Garrigues >> >> On Mon, Sep 21, 2020 at 3:09 PM Dave Cramer <davecramer@postgres.rocks> >> wrote: >> >> >> > There was a comment upthread a while back that people should look at the >> > comments made in >> > https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/20180322.211148.187821341.horiguchi.kyotaro%40lab.ntt.co.jp >> > by Horiguchi-San. >> > >> > From what I can tell this has not been addressed. The one big thing is the >> > use of PQbatchProcessQueue vs just putting it in PQgetResult. >> > >> > The argument is that adding PQbatchProcessQueue is unnecessary and just >> > adds another step. Looking at this, it seems like putting this inside >> > PQgetResult would get my vote as it leaves the interface unchanged. >> > >> >> Ok. I'll merge PQbatchProcessQueue into PQgetResult. But just one >> thing: I'll keep PQgetResult returning null between the result of two >> batched query so the user >> can know which result comes from which query. > > > Fair enough. > > There may be other things in his comments that need to be addressed. That was > the big one that stuck out for me. > > Thanks for working on this! >
Yes I already addressed the other things in the v19 patch: https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/flat/cajkzx4t5e-2cqe3dtv2r78dyfvz+in8py7a8marvlhs_pg7...@mail.gmail.com
