> Alvaro Herrera wrote: > > Bruce Momjian wrote: > > > Mario Weilguni wrote: > > > > Will this patch make it into 8.2? > > > > http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-patches/2004-12/msg00228.php > > > > > > > > It's a really nice feature, would be extremly useful with tools like > > > > pgpool. > > > > > > No, it will not because RESET CONNECTION can mess up interface code that > > > doesn't want the connection reset. We are not sure how to handle that. > > > > Hmm, what interface code are you talking about? > > I believe JDBC, for example, sets things inside the interface that would > be broken by RESET CONNECTION. Here is a thread about it: > > http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-patches/2005-01/msg00029.php
I think we had similar problem with client encoding and solved it by using parameter status. Why don't we solve the JDBC problem in the same way? -- Tatsuo Ishii SRA OSS, Inc. Japan ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 2: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster
