| From: | Vladimir Sitnikov <sitnikov(dot)vladimir(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tatsuo Ishii <ishii(at)sraoss(dot)co(dot)jp> |
| Cc: | roji(at)roji(dot)org, sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net, robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, andres(at)anarazel(dot)de, stark(at)mit(dot)edu, ishii(at)postgresql(dot)org, tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us |
| Subject: | Re: Slowness of extended protocol |
| Date: | 2016-08-19 06:41:36 |
| Message-ID: | CAB=Je-FzPCQuwzrt4ZT8bHWpFYazKiCMs0MN9WCGgBFviRPqsQ@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Tatsuo>understanding it always uses unnamed portal even if the SQL is like
"BEGIN" or "COMMIT" (no parameters). They are too often used. Why not
doing like this?
Does it actually work?
The documentation says named portals last till the end of the transaction:
https://www.postgresql.org/docs/9.5/static/protocol-flow.html#PROTOCOL-FLOW-EXT-QUERY
doc>If successfully created, a named portal object lasts till the end of
the current transaction, unless explicitly destroyed
Vladimir
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Michael Paquier | 2016-08-19 06:46:50 | Re: Password identifiers, protocol aging and SCRAM protocol |
| Previous Message | Tatsuo Ishii | 2016-08-19 06:17:37 | Exporting more function in libpq |