elein wrote: > On Fri, Jan 05, 2007 at 08:45:51PM -0500, Tom Lane wrote: > > Ron Mayer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > Tom Lane wrote: > > >> Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > >>> What value is allowing multiple queies via PQexec() > > >> > > >> The only argument I can think of is that it allows applications to be > > >> sloppy about parsing a SQL script into individual commands before they > > >> send it. (I think initdb may be guilty of exactly that BTW...) At the > > >> same time you could argue that such sloppiness is inherently a Bad Idea. > > > > > Doesn't it also avoid some network(?) overhead when you have > > > a large number of small inserts or updates? > > > > > I seem to recall a previous company where we had a major performance > > > by concatenating a bunch of updates with ";"s in between and sending > > > them to postgresql as a single command. > > > > These days you'd probably be better off using a multi-row VALUES() list > > if relevant. Also, if you really want to send multiple statements like > > that, there's a cleaner way to do it: use the extended query protocol > > and don't Sync or wait for a reply until you've sent them all. > > > > regards, tom lane > > > In shell scripts that do things in the database I often put >1 statement > in the line. Since it is the shell, I want quick results. Usually it > is an INSERT/UPDATE followed by a SELECT. > > It would be very frustrating not to be able to send multiple commands > with one -c in psql.
We aren't going to disable that --- we are considering disabling the backend from treating it as a single transaction. -- Bruce Momjian [EMAIL PROTECTED] EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com + If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your backup. + ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 5: don't forget to increase your free space map settings