From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
To: Hiroshi Inoue <Inoue@tpf.co.jp>
Cc: Dave Page <dpage@vale-housing.co.uk>
Cc: ZeugswetterA@spardat.at
Cc: pgman@candle.pha.pa.us
Cc: pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
Cc: pgsql-interfaces@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: Roadmap for FE/BE protocol redesign
Date: Thu, 13 Mar 2003 19:11:23 -0500
Message-ID: <12415.1047600683@sss.pgh.pa.us> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <3E711B09.3D81D7DE@tpf.co.jp>
References: <03AF4E498C591348A42FC93DEA9661B8259D8D@mail.vale-housing.co.uk>
<27130.1047484194@sss.pgh.pa.us>
<3E702552.DA8A29A9@tpf.co.jp>
<50073.80.177.99.193.1047549156.squirrel@ssl.vale-housing.co.uk>
<4860.1047568767@sss.pgh.pa.us>
<3E711B09.3D81D7DE@tpf.co.jp>
Hiroshi Inoue <Inoue@tpf.co.jp> writes:
> Hmm as for PREPAREd statements, it seems much better to
> implement functions which returns fields info for the
> statement than relying on such a protocol level change.
Well, we're changing the protocol anyway for other purposes, so the
extra burden of a change here doesn't seem large. I think it's more
useful to worry about what functionality we want than to worry about
whether it's changed...
regards, tom lane
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-interfaces@postgresql.org
Cc: tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us, Inoue@tpf.co.jp, dpage@vale-housing.co.uk, ZeugswetterA@spardat.at, pgman@candle.pha.pa.us, pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: Roadmap for FE/BE protocol redesign
In-Reply-To: <12415.1047600683@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 DDX for PostgreSQL; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox