Re: 7.3 schedule - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Neil Conway
Subject Re: 7.3 schedule
Date
Msg-id 20020411115434.201ff92f.nconway@klamath.dyndns.org
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: 7.3 schedule  (Ashley Cambrell <ash@freaky-namuh.com>)
Responses Re: 7.3 schedule  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Thu, 11 Apr 2002 16:25:24 +1000
"Ashley Cambrell" <ash@freaky-namuh.com> wrote:
> What are the chances that the BE/FE will be altered to take advantage of 
> prepare / execute? Or is it something that will "never happen"?

Is there a need for this? The current patch I'm working on just
does everything using SQL statements, which I don't think is
too bad (the typical client programmer won't actually need to
see them, their interface should wrap the PREPARE/EXECUTE stuff
for them).

On the other hand, there are already a few reasons to make some
changes to the FE/BE protocol (NOTIFY messages, transaction state,
and now possibly PREPARE/EXECUTE -- anything else?). IMHO, each of
these isn't worth changing the protocol by itself, but perhaps if
we can get all 3 in one swell foop it might be a good idea...

Cheers,

Neil

-- 
Neil Conway <neilconway@rogers.com>
PGP Key ID: DB3C29FC


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Peter Eisentraut
Date:
Subject: Re: 7.3 schedule
Next
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: Implicit coercions need to be reined in