>> On 2018-Dec-03, Tatsuo Ishii wrote:
>>
>>> To:
>>> ---
>>> -M querymode
>>> --protocol=querymode
>>>
>>> Protocol to use for submitting queries to the server:
>>>
>>> simple: use simple query protocol.
>>>
>>>
> On 2018-Dec-03, Tatsuo Ishii wrote:
>
>> To:
>> ---
>> -M querymode
>> --protocol=querymode
>>
>> Protocol to use for submitting queries to the server:
>>
>> simple: use simple query protocol.
>>
>> extended:
On 2018-Dec-03, Tatsuo Ishii wrote:
> To:
> ---
> -M querymode
> --protocol=querymode
>
> Protocol to use for submitting queries to the server:
>
> simple: use simple query protocol.
>
> extended: use extended
> So I do not think a more precise wording harms. Maybe: "prepared: use
> extended query protocol with REUSED named prepared statements" would
> be even less slightly ambiguous.
I like this. But maybe we can remove "named"?
>>>
>>> I also think it makes sense to adjust
So I do not think a more precise wording harms. Maybe: "prepared: use
extended query protocol with REUSED named prepared statements" would
be even less slightly ambiguous.
I like this. But maybe we can remove "named"?
I also think it makes sense to adjust wording a bit here, and this
On 30/11/2018 15:42, Dmitry Dolgov wrote:
>> On Sat, Nov 3, 2018 at 1:08 AM Tatsuo Ishii wrote:
>>
>>> So I do not think a more precise wording harms. Maybe: "prepared: use
>>> extended query protocol with REUSED named prepared statements" would
>>> be even less slightly ambiguous.
>>
>> I like
> On Sat, Nov 3, 2018 at 1:08 AM Tatsuo Ishii wrote:
>
> > So I do not think a more precise wording harms. Maybe: "prepared: use
> > extended query protocol with REUSED named prepared statements" would
> > be even less slightly ambiguous.
>
> I like this. But maybe we can remove "named"?
I also
"prepared: use extended query protocol with reused prepared statements"
I don't think this mouthful is useful in the --help output. The
existing wording gets the message across just fine, I think. More
details can be put in the reference page.
These suggestions are for the online doc
On 03/11/2018 01:08, Tatsuo Ishii wrote:
> I like this. But maybe we can remove "named"?
>
> "prepared: use extended query protocol with reused prepared statements"
I don't think this mouthful is useful in the --help output. The
existing wording gets the message across just fine, I think. More
> So I do not think a more precise wording harms. Maybe: "prepared: use
> extended query protocol with REUSED named prepared statements" would
> be even less slightly ambiguous.
I like this. But maybe we can remove "named"?
"prepared: use extended query protocol with reused prepared statements"
Robert,
Yes, you need to send params (thus send bind message) anyway.
Regarding re-parsing, maybe you mixed up parse-analythis with
planning? Re-parse-analythis can only be avoided if you can reuse
named (or unnamed) parepared statements.
So given this, I'm struggling to see anything wrong
On Tue, Oct 30, 2018 at 8:48 AM Tatsuo Ishii wrote:
> Yes, you need to send params (thus send bind message) anyway.
> Regarding re-parsing, maybe you mixed up parse-analythis with
> planning? Re-parse-analythis can only be avoided if you can reuse
> named (or unnamed) parepared statements.
So
Hi Fabien,
> Ok, I understand that you mean that PQsendQueryParams uses an unamed
> query internally to separate parsing & execution, which seems indeed
> to be the case by looking at the libpq client-side code.
>
> However, if I'm not mistaken, the params version always sends and
> possibly
Hello Tatsuo-san,
pgbench doc (and some comments in pgbench.c) regarding "-M prepared"
option is not quite correct. [...] Actually "extended" mode uses
prepared statements too.
Ok, I understand that you mean that PQsendQueryParams uses an unamed query
internally to separate parsing &
pgbench doc (and some comments in pgbench.c) regarding "-M prepared"
option is not quite correct.
-M querymode
--protocol=querymode
Protocol to use for submitting queries to the server:
simple: use simple query
15 matches
Mail list logo
