From: | Neil Conway <neilc(at)samurai(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | Joachim Wieland <joe(at)mcknight(dot)de>, pgsql-patches(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: TODO item: list prepared queries |
Date: | 2006-01-03 23:00:13 |
Message-ID: | 43BB01FD.4000704@samurai.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-patches |
Tom Lane wrote:
> In practice, any given application will probably use one method to the
> exclusion of the other, and wouldn't notice the "inconsistency" anyway.
> If you are using both methods of preparing statements for some reason,
> it's not improbable that you would want to know which way a given
> statement was created, and seeing the PREPARE in there would be a useful
> cue.
The "from_sql" field of the view is an infinitely better way to
determine the source of the prepared statement.
Anyway, if there was a reasonably cheap way to present the query strings
of protocol-level and SQL prepared statements in the same manner, I
think we should definitely do so. Since there doesn't appear to be one,
I'm content to just use the query string as sent by the user. I'll post
a revised patch that does that soon.
-Neil
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Greg Stark | 2006-01-03 23:28:34 | Re: Stats collector performance improvement |
Previous Message | Hannu Krosing | 2006-01-03 21:42:53 | Re: Stats collector performance improvement |