On 04/10/16 20:15, Michael Paquier wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 3, 2016 at 11:52 PM, Daniel Verite <daniel@manitou-mail.org> wrote:
>> Wouldn't pgbench benefit from it?
>> It was mentioned some time ago [1], in relationship to the
>> \into construct, how client-server latency was important enough to
>> justify the use of a "\;" separator between statements, to send them
>> as a group.
>>
>> But with the libpq batch API, maybe this could be modernized
>> with meta-commands like this:
>> \startbatch
>> ...
>> \endbatch
> Or just \batch [on|off], which sounds like a damn good idea to me for
> some users willing to test some workloads before integrating it in an
> application.
+1
'\batch' is a bit easier, to find, & to remember than '\startbatch'
