Karel Zak wrote:
> On Thu, 2 Nov 2000, Zeugswetter Andreas SB wrote:
> > > Well I can re-write and resubmit this patch. Add it as a
> > > compile time option
> > > is not bad idea. Second possibility is distribute it as patch
> > > in the contrib
> > > tree. And if it until not good tested not dirty with this main tree...
> > >
> > > Ok, I next week prepare it...
> > One thing that worries me though is, that it extends the sql language,
> > and there has been no discussion about the chosen syntax.
> > Imho the standard embedded SQL syntax (prepare ...) could be a
> > starting point.
> Yes, you are right... my PREPARE/EXECUTE is not too much ready to SQL92,
> I some old letter I speculate about "SAVE/EXECUTE PLAN" instead
> PREPARE/EXECUTE. But don't forget, it will *experimental* patch... we can
> change it in future ..etc.
[Sorry, I didn't look into your patch, yet.]
What about parameters? Normally you can prepare a statement and execute it
using different parameters. AFAIK postgres' frontend-backend protocol is not
designed to take parameters for statements (e.g. like result presents
results). A very long road to go.
By the way, I'm somewhat interested in getting this feature in. Perhaps it
should be part of a protocol redesign (e.g. binary parameters/results).
Handling endianness is one aspect, floats are harder (but float->ascii->float
sometimes fails as well).
In response to
pgsql-hackers by date
|Next:||From: Tom Lane||Date: 2000-11-03 16:08:49|
|Subject: Re: [HACKERS] OSDN Database conference report (long) |
|Previous:||From: Ross J. Reedstrom||Date: 2000-11-03 15:29:07|
|Subject: Re: Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql/contrib/pg_dumpaccounts (Makefile README pg_dumpaccounts.sh)|