Albe Laurenz <laurenz.albe@wien.gv.at> writes:
> Why do you need to track prepared statements on the client side?
The proposed change would fail to allow that anyway; consider the
possibility of a server-side function doing one or more PREPAREs or
DEALLOCATEs. The command tag would be completely inadequate for
reporting that.
Space is also a problem, since existing clients expect the tags to be
pretty short --- for instance, libpq has always had a hard-wired limit
of 64 bytes (CMDSTATUS_LEN) on what it can store for the tag. That's
not enough for a command name plus a full-length identifier.
If we were to try to do this, we'd need to invent some other reporting
mechanism, perhaps similar to ParameterStatus for GUC_REPORT variables.
But that would be a protocol break, which means it's unlikely to happen
anytime soon.
regards, tom lane
