From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | "Stuart Cooper" <stuart(dot)cooper(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | "Tom Allison" <tom(at)tacocat(dot)net>, "General PostgreSQL List" <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: prepare() |
Date: | 2007-05-30 03:10:54 |
Message-ID: | 26060.1180494654@sss.pgh.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general |
"Stuart Cooper" <stuart(dot)cooper(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> My system is stabilised and I'm looking at this now. I'm not getting a
> lot from pg_prepared_statements yet: perhaps this view only reports on
> statements you've prepared using PostgreSQL's PREPARE through their
> SQL interface, and not DBI's DBD::Pg $dbh->prepare().
A quick look at the source code says that pg_prepared_statements should
show both statements prepared with the SQL-level PREPARE command, and
statements prepared through the wire-protocol Parse message (excluding
the "unnamed" statement in the latter case). I'm not familiar with the
guts of DBD::Pg, however; it may not be "preparing" statements in any
sense that the backend knows about, but only massaging them locally to
the client library. It likely matters which version of DBD::Pg you're
talking about, too, because the backend's support for this sort of thing
has been a moving target.
regards, tom lane
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Erwin Brandstetter | 2007-05-30 03:24:57 | Re: SELECT <all fields except "bad_field"> from mytbl; |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2007-05-30 02:59:35 | Re: Problem with timestamp |