Tom Lane wrote:
> "Kevin Grittner" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> >>> "statement" isn't a great name for the units
> >>> that we are actually processing. We're really wanting to do these
> >>> things once per client command, or maybe per client query would be
> >>> a better name.
> >>
> >> Right.
Neil Conway <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> One question about behavior: in the attached patch, omitting an argument
> to \connect or specifying "-" are treated equivalently -- the value for
> that parameter from the previous connection is used, otherwise NULL (for
> the libpq default). Is this what
On Sun, 2006-03-12 at 19:59 +0200, Volkan YAZICI wrote:
> I've written do_connect() and \c handling part from scratch in the
> attached patch.
Attached is a revised version of this patch. I rewrote most of the code,
because the existing stuff was in pretty bad style IMHO. I haven't
updated the doc
On Sun, 2 Apr 2006, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> Jeremy Drake wrote:
> > The intel C compiler for linux emulates gcc
> > by default, which means it defines that and looks very much like gcc
> > to configure. However, it does not get along with the added -W flags
> > very well. They don't seem to ki
Jeremy Drake wrote:
> The intel C compiler for linux emulates gcc
> by default, which means it defines that and looks very much like gcc
> to configure. However, it does not get along with the added -W flags
> very well. They don't seem to kill it, but some of them give
> warnings about unsupport
If configure sees that the compiler specified by $CC looks like gcc
(defines __GNUC__), then it puts some extra command line options into the
CFLAGS (mostly -W*). The intel C compiler for linux emulates gcc by
default, which means it defines that and looks very much like gcc to
configure. However
