From: | Bruce Momjian <maillist(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | vadim(at)sable(dot)krasnoyarsk(dot)su (Vadim B(dot) Mikheev) |
Cc: | hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org (PostgreSQL-development) |
Subject: | Re: [HACKERS] ecpg stuff |
Date: | 1998-02-18 15:08:17 |
Message-ID: | 199802181508.KAA15640@candle.pha.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
>
> Meskes, Michael wrote:
> >
> > Or we should change the declare/open behaviour in that it ignores the
> > embedded SQL declare command and just sends the declare command when it
> > finds an open. But then standard may say that the actual way is correct.
>
> It seems that OPEN is in standard and this is really bad that we havn't
> OPEN statement: using DECLARE we could plan query once and then
> re-use this plan many times - OPEN, FETCH-es, CLOSE; OPEN, ...
> Also, we could use queries with parameters (like in SQL-funcs: $1, ...)
> in DECLARE and then assign parameter' values in OPEN and execute
> cursor for different values.
> Isn't this what Oracle allow ?
Yes, I agree we should have it, and allow cursors outside transactions
with OPEN/CLOSE behavior.
Added to TODO.
--
Bruce Momjian
maillist(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Bruce Momjian | 1998-02-18 15:10:25 | Re: [HACKERS] new Group BY code |
Previous Message | Bruce Momjian | 1998-02-18 15:01:16 | Re: [HACKERS] Memory leaks for large objects |