| From: | Tatsuo Ishii <ishii(at)sraoss(dot)co(dot)jp> |
|---|---|
| To: | postgres(at)jeltef(dot)nl |
| Cc: | m(dot)zhilin(at)postgrespro(dot)ru, sitnikov(dot)vladimir(at)gmail(dot)com, davecramer(at)postgres(dot)rocks, tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: When extended query protocol ends? |
| Date: | 2024-02-28 12:05:32 |
| Message-ID: | 20240228.210532.1955389974353647116.t-ishii@sranhm.sra.co.jp |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
> And that's also where sending a Query instead of a Sync introduces a
> problem: What is supposed to happen if something fails. Let's take the
> simple example Bind-Execute-Query: If the Execute causes an error, is
> the Query still executed or not? And what about if the Query fails, is
> the Execute before committed or rolled back?
>
> That's why we have the Sync messages, clarify what happens when a
> failure occurs somewhere in the pipeline. And only extended protocol
> messages are allowed to be part of a pipeline: "Use of the extended
> query protocol allows pipelining"
Good point. If we have started extended protocol messages, I think
there's no way to avoid the Sync messages before issuing simple
protocol messages.
Best reagards,
--
Tatsuo Ishii
SRA OSS LLC
English: http://www.sraoss.co.jp/index_en/
Japanese:http://www.sraoss.co.jp
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Heikki Linnakangas | 2024-02-28 12:10:20 | Re: Experiments with Postgres and SSL |
| Previous Message | Matthias van de Meent | 2024-02-28 12:00:52 | Re: Experiments with Postgres and SSL |