From: | Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> |
---|---|
To: | Neil Conway <nconway(at)klamath(dot)dyndns(dot)org> |
Cc: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, PostgreSQL Development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: [PATCHES] prepareable statements |
Date: | 2002-07-25 20:54:04 |
Message-ID: | Pine.LNX.4.44.0207242132300.1144-100000@localhost.localdomain |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers pgsql-patches |
Neil Conway writes:
> Regarding the syntax for EXECUTE, it occurs to me that it could be made
> to be more similar to the PREPARE syntax -- i.e.
>
> PREPARE foo(text, int) AS ...;
>
> EXECUTE foo('a', 1);
>
> (rather than EXECUTE USING -- the effect being that prepared statements
> now look more like function calls on a syntactical level, which I think
> is okay.)
I'm not sure I like that. It seems too confusing. Why not keep it as the
standard says? (After all, it is the PREPARE part that we're adjusting,
not EXECUTE.)
--
Peter Eisentraut peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Peter Eisentraut | 2002-07-25 20:54:53 | Re: CREATE SYNONYM suggestions |
Previous Message | Kangmo, Kim | 2002-07-25 20:34:25 | Re: tuple concurrently updated |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Neil Conway | 2002-07-25 21:00:24 | Re: [PATCHES] prepareable statements |
Previous Message | Neil Conway | 2002-07-25 20:25:35 | COPY improvements |