Re: Frontend/backend protocol improvements proposal (request).

On Fri, Jun 21, 2013 at 12:37:32PM +0400, Dmitriy Igrishin wrote:
> 2013/6/21 Albe Laurenz <laurenz(dot)albe(at)wien(dot)gv(dot)at>
> > Dmitriy Igrishin wrote:
> > > While developing a C++ client library for Postgres I felt lack of extra
> > > information in command tags in the CommandComplete (B) message
> > > for the following commands:
> > > PREPARE;
> > > DEALLOCATE;
> > > DECLARE;
> > > CLOSE;
> > > LISTEN;
> > > UNLISTEN;
> > > SET;
> > > RESET.
> > > Namely, for example, users of my library can prepare statements by using
> > > protocol directly or via PREPARE command. Since the protocol does not
> > > supports prepared statement deallocation, I wrote a wrapper over
> > DEALLOCATE
> > > command. The library knows about all prepared statements and
> > > invalidates them automatically when user performs deallocate() wrapper.
> > > But users can go with DEALLOCATE command directly and in these cases
> > > I need to query the database to get the list of currently prepared
> > statements
> > > whenever CommandComplete message with DEALLOCATE command tag
> > > is consumed. Moreover, I need to do it *synchronously* and this breaks
> > > asynchronous API.
> > > I propose to include name of the object in the CommandComplete (B)
> > > message for the above commands.
> >
> > That would be a change in the protocol, so it's not likely to happen
> > soon. There is a page where proposed changes to the wire protocol
> > are collected: http://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/Todo#Wire_Protocol_Changes
>
> Well, even if this proposal moves to the TODO, it would be nice.

That's worth at least considering when we start to revise the protocol, so I
have added it to the TODO list.

--
Noah Misch
EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com