From: | Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | Kevin Grittner <Kevin(dot)Grittner(at)wicourts(dot)gov>, Brendan Jurd <direvus(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-patches(at)postgresql(dot)org, Neil Conway <neilc(at)samurai(dot)com> |
Subject: | Re: Additional current timestamp values |
Date: | 2006-04-02 03:30:30 |
Message-ID: | 200604020330.k323UUf00258@candle.pha.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers pgsql-patches |
Tom Lane wrote:
> "Kevin Grittner" <Kevin(dot)Grittner(at)wicourts(dot)gov> writes:
> >>> "statement" isn't a great name for the units
> >>> that we are actually processing. We're really wanting to do these
> >>> things once per client command, or maybe per client query would be
> >>> a better name.
> >>
> >> Right.
>
> > What about "query string"? If you want to include the term "client", I
> > would find "client query string" less confusing than "client command" or
> > "client query".
>
> "Query string" is a term we've used in the past, and it shows up in the
> source code. I could live with that, but I'm not sure if it's got any
> good connotations for people who haven't got their hands dirty in the
> code ...
Peter hammered us quite a bit in the past that we send "statements", not
just queries (aka SELECT). It is hard to argue with that.
--
Bruce Momjian http://candle.pha.pa.us
+ If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your backup. +
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Neil Conway | 2006-04-02 04:02:40 | pgsql: Correct some errors and do some SGML police work on the reference |
Previous Message | Christopher Browne | 2006-04-02 02:30:06 | Re: Slony-I for circular replication |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Guillaume Smet | 2006-04-02 11:18:13 | Re: Patch proposal for log_duration |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2006-04-02 00:46:07 | Re: psql patch: new host/port without leaving session |