| From: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> |
| Cc: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, David Fetter <david(at)fetter(dot)org>, Kyotaro HORIGUCHI <horiguchi(dot)kyotaro(at)lab(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp>, wufei(dot)fnst(at)cn(dot)fujitsu(dot)com, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Willing to fix a PQexec() in libpq module |
| Date: | 2019-03-19 16:59:34 |
| Message-ID: | 20190319165934.GA29160@alvherre.pgsql |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 2019-Mar-19, Andres Freund wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On 2019-03-19 12:51:39 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> > David Fetter <david(at)fetter(dot)org> writes:
> > > I think the answer is "no," and we should deprecate this misfeature.
> > > It's bad enough that we'll be supporting it for five years after
> > > deprecating it, but it's worse to leave it hanging around our necks
> > > forever. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Albatross_(metaphor)
> >
> > The problem with that approach is that not everybody agrees that
> > it's a misfeature.
>
> Yea, it's extremely useful to just be able to send a whole script to the
> server. Otherwise every application wanting to do so needs to be able to
> split SQL statements, not exactly a trivial task. And the result will be
> slower, due to increased rountrips.
I suppose it can be argued that for the cases where they want that, it
is not entirely ridiculous to have it be done with a different API call,
say PQexecMultiple.
--
Álvaro Herrera https://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | David Fetter | 2019-03-19 17:02:23 | Re: Willing to fix a PQexec() in libpq module |
| Previous Message | Andres Freund | 2019-03-19 16:55:57 | Re: Willing to fix a PQexec() in libpq module |