Marti Raudsepp <ma...@juffo.org> writes:
> On Thu, Feb 20, 2014 at 12:07 PM, Ashutosh Bapat
> <ashutosh.ba...@enterprisedb.com> wrote:
>> That seems a good idea. We will get rid of FETCH_COUNT then, wouldn't we?
> No, I don't think we want to do that. FETCH_COUNT values greater than
> 1 are still useful to get reasonably tabulated output without hogging
> too much memory.
Yeah. The other reason that you can't just transparently change the
behavior is error handling: people are used to seeing either all or
none of the output of a query. In single-row mode that guarantee
fails, since some rows might get output before the server detects
an error.
regards, tom lane
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
