From: | Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz> |
---|---|
To: | Anthonin Bonnefoy <anthonin(dot)bonnefoy(at)datadoghq(dot)com> |
Cc: | Daniel Verite <daniel(at)manitou-mail(dot)org>, Jelte Fennema-Nio <postgres(at)jeltef(dot)nl>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Add Pipelining support in psql |
Date: | 2025-03-18 00:50:27 |
Message-ID: | Z9jDU_v_eGbZNkCU@paquier.xyz |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Mon, Mar 17, 2025 at 10:50:50AM +0100, Anthonin Bonnefoy wrote:
> 0001: This introduces the \sendpipeline meta-command and forbid \g in
> a pipeline. This is to fix the formatting options of \g that are not
> supported in a pipeline.
- count
--------
- 4
-(1 row)
This removal done in the regression tests was not intentional.
I have done some reordering of the code around the new meta-command so
as things are ordered alphabetically, and applied the result.
> 0002: Allows ';' to send a query using extended protocol when within a
> pipeline by using PQsendQueryParams with 0 parameters. It is not
> possible to send parameters with extended protocol this way and
> everything will be propagated through the query string, similar to a
> simple query.
I like the simplicity of what you are doing here, relying on
PSQL_SEND_QUERY being the default so as we use PQsendQueryParams()
with no parameters rather than PQsendQuery() when the pipeline mode is
not off.
How about adding a check on PIPELINE_COMMAND_COUNT when sending a
query through this path? Should we check for more scenarios with
syncs and flushes as well when sending these queries?
--
Michael
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Nathan Bossart | 2025-03-18 01:01:48 | Re: Statistics Import and Export |
Previous Message | Jelte Fennema-Nio | 2025-03-18 00:42:09 | Re: Support a wildcard in backtrace_functions |