| From: | Michael Meskes <meskes(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
|---|---|
| To: | Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz> |
| Cc: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)bowt(dot)ie>, "kuroda(dot)hayato(at)fujitsu(dot)com" <kuroda(dot)hayato(at)fujitsu(dot)com>, Kyotaro Horiguchi <horikyota(dot)ntt(at)gmail(dot)com>, "pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Subject: | Re: ECPG bug fix: DECALRE STATEMENT and DEALLOCATE, DESCRIBE |
| Date: | 2021-08-11 20:41:59 |
| Message-ID: | 716c23b239ff3f11ea1a574e81683d9d8bd58d8c.camel@postgresql.org |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
> Sure, DECLARE does not matter as it is new. However, please note
> that
> the specific point I was trying to make with my link [2] from
> upthread
> is related to the use of cached connection names with DEALLOCATE, as
> of this line in the new test declare.pgc:
> EXEC SQL DEALLOCATE PREPARE stmt_2;
>
> And DEALLOCATE is far from being new.
I'm not sure I understand. Any usage of DECLARE STATEMENT makes the
file need the current version of ecpg anyway. On the other hand
DEALLOCATE did not change its behavior if no DECLARE STATEMENT was
issued, or what did I miss?
Michael
--
Michael Meskes
Michael at Fam-Meskes dot De
Michael at Meskes dot (De|Com|Net|Org)
Meskes at (Debian|Postgresql) dot Org
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tomas Vondra | 2021-08-11 22:00:12 | Re: Use extended statistics to estimate (Var op Var) clauses |
| Previous Message | Melanie Plageman | 2021-08-11 20:11:34 | Re: pg_stat_bgwriter.buffers_backend is pretty meaningless (and more?) |