On Thu, Sep 2, 2010 at 1:00 AM, David Powell wrote:
> Thanks Jason, I think I had read that - I quite enjoy Edward's posts.
> Re-reading, seems to confirm what I thought, most (all?) of the FFI calls in
> HDBC-postgresql should be changed to "safe".
Wouldn't that require thread safety on the part
On Wed, Sep 1, 2010 at 10:00 PM, David Powell wrote:
>
> Thanks Jason, I think I had read that - I quite enjoy Edward's posts.
> Re-reading, seems to confirm what I thought, most (all?) of the FFI calls in
> HDBC-postgresql should be changed to "safe".
Yes I think so. Unless you know the call is
Thanks Jason, I think I had read that - I quite enjoy Edward's posts.
Re-reading, seems to confirm what I thought, most (all?) of the FFI calls in
HDBC-postgresql should be changed to "safe".
-- David
On Thu, Sep 2, 2010 at 2:47 PM, Jason Dagit wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 1, 2010 at 7:40 PM, David Pow
On Wed, Sep 1, 2010 at 7:40 PM, David Powell wrote:
> Greetings,
>
> I'm having an issue with the HDBC-postgresql package that requires me to
> manually patch it before installation for most of my use cases.
>
> All the FFI calls in this package are marked "unsafe". Unfortunately, this
> means th
Greetings,
I'm having an issue with the HDBC-postgresql package that requires me to
manually patch it before installation for most of my use cases.
All the FFI calls in this package are marked "unsafe". Unfortunately, this
means that whenever I issue a slow sql query, all other processing stops.
