agora inbox for pgsql-docs@postgresql.org
help / color / mirror / Atom feedFrom: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
To: Laurenz Albe <laurenz.albe@cybertec.at>
Cc: David G. Johnston <david.g.johnston@gmail.com>
Cc: petermittere@gmail.com
Cc: pgsql-docs@lists.postgresql.org
Subject: Re: please define 'statement' in the glossary
Date: Mon, 14 Jul 2025 11:17:34 -0400
Message-ID: <685003.1752506254@sss.pgh.pa.us> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <ec1e6bb700f9eefceea0648656b38ab223c14c54.camel@cybertec.at>
References: <175223006802.3157505.14764328206246105568@wrigleys.postgresql.org>
<15139c5d218754350e4870062f90ff0e85490290.camel@cybertec.at>
<270191.1752420426@sss.pgh.pa.us>
<097e693ea6cc3541cbcd72c915d7d492c26930c0.camel@cybertec.at>
<456003.1752442676@sss.pgh.pa.us>
<458204.1752443813@sss.pgh.pa.us>
<CAKFQuwa4VMoHehuN5qCX5Jv15ZahTJ00jxMu4mbtYNHbJ4PXOA@mail.gmail.com>
<ec1e6bb700f9eefceea0648656b38ab223c14c54.camel@cybertec.at>
Laurenz Albe <laurenz.albe@cybertec.at> writes:
> On Sun, 2025-07-13 at 17:32 -0700, David G. Johnston wrote:
>> We seldom if ever resort to including descriptions involving the fe/be protocol
>> in the SQL portion of the documentation - rightly considering (IMO) those to be
>> implementation details (e.g., we don't even directly mention simple protocol in
>> "psql -c" - though we do link to it under "multi-statement commands").
>> Is there no way to avoid that here?
> Well, I would have gladly removed the parenthetical remark, thinking that if
> somebody needed to know precisely, she'd read up in the code.
The point that I wanted to convey in this para is that
statement_timestamp() advances when we receive a command from the
client. I don't think that that concept is too deep for the average
user, we just need to choose the right words to convey it. Sadly,
"SQL statement" doesn't have the right connotations, since for example
a command within a SQL-language function is surely a "SQL statement"
for most purposes. We're stuck with the function name, but how can we
explain it?
I understand David's allergy to mentioning the wire protocol. Would
"client message" be better than "protocol message"? I also still like
"command message", even if we're avoiding the word "command" elsewhere
in the para.
regards, tom lane
view thread (21+ messages) latest in thread
Message-ID: <685003.1752506254@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Permalink: ../685003.1752506254@sss.pgh.pa.us/
Also on: postgresql.org/message-id/685003.1752506254@sss.pgh.pa.us
reply
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Reply to all the recipients using the --to and --cc options:
reply via email
To: pgsql-docs@postgresql.org
Cc: tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us, laurenz.albe@cybertec.at, david.g.johnston@gmail.com, petermittere@gmail.com, pgsql-docs@lists.postgresql.org
Subject: Re: please define 'statement' in the glossary
In-Reply-To: <685003.1752506254@sss.pgh.pa.us>
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
This inbox is served by agora; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox