Re: [PATCHES] prepareable statements - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From nconway@klamath.dyndns.org (Neil Conway)
Subject Re: [PATCHES] prepareable statements
Date
Msg-id 20020725210024.GA24045@klamath.dyndns.org
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: [PATCHES] prepareable statements  (Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net>)
Responses Re: [PATCHES] prepareable statements  (Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Thu, Jul 25, 2002 at 10:54:04PM +0200, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> I'm not sure I like that.  It seems too confusing.  Why not keep
> it as the standard says?  (After all, it is the PREPARE part that
> we're adjusting, not EXECUTE.)

I think it's both, isn't it? My understanding of Tom's post is that the
features described by SQL92 are somewhat similar to the patch, but not
directly related.

On the other hand, if other people also find it confusing, that would be
a good justification for changing it. Personally, I think it's pretty
clear, but I'm not adamant about it.

Cheers,

Neil

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


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Peter Eisentraut
Date:
Subject: Re: regression in CVS HEAD
Next
From: Mike Mascari
Date:
Subject: Re: tuple concurrently updated