| From: | Jelte Fennema-Nio <postgres(at)jeltef(dot)nl> |
|---|---|
| To: | Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz> |
| Cc: | Anthonin Bonnefoy <anthonin(dot)bonnefoy(at)datadoghq(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Add Pipelining support in psql |
| Date: | 2024-11-28 09:06:28 |
| Message-ID: | CAGECzQTiCvOxxuA98Ei+qVb1px82eP-iRvJvnvrcKU1de55-Pw@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Thu, 28 Nov 2024 at 07:43, Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz> wrote:
> Hmm. The start, end and sync meta-commands are useful for testing. I
> find the flush control a bit less interesting, TBH.
>
> What would you use these for?
I guess mostly for interactively playing around with pipelining from psql.
But I think \getresult would be useful for testing too. This would
allow us to test that we can read part of the pipeline, without
sending a sync and waiting for everything.
To be clear \flushrequest and \flush would be necessary to make
\getresult work reliably.
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | vignesh C | 2024-11-28 09:13:50 | Re: Introduce XID age and inactive timeout based replication slot invalidation |
| Previous Message | Andrey M. Borodin | 2024-11-28 08:09:43 | Re: UUID v7 |