Dave Cramer wrote:
>
> On 3-Aug-06, at 11:55 PM, Bruce Momjian wrote:
>
> > Dave Cramer wrote:
> >>
> >> On 3-Aug-06, at 6:14 PM, Oliver Jowett wrote:
> >>
> >>> Dave Cramer wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> If that's the case then the driver is not doing what it's supposed
> >>>> to be doing. It should be using the named portal (S_3) to do the
> >>>> insert.
> >>>
> >>> No, the driver is fine. It is using a named statement (S_3) but an
> >>> unnamed portal (because it is going to fetch all the data in one go
> >>> and doesn't need to retain the portal after execution)
> >>>
> >>> If your query met the conditions for using a portal-based
> >>> ResultSet, you'd see it use a named portal as well as a named
> >>> statement.
> >>
> >> Thanks for clarifying that Oliver, the logs are still misleading in
> >> that they don't name the statement used in the bind message.
> >
> > Current CVS has:
> >
> > (errmsg("statement: [protocol] <BIND> %s", portal_name)));
>
> Bind also has a statement name, as well as a portal name ?
>
> Ideally I'd like to see the parameters which were bound and the
> types, but I suspect I'm reaching here.
Right, but do we want to repeat the statement for every bind case?
The bind parameter printing is on the TODO list.
--
Bruce Momjian bruce@momjian.us
EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com
+ If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your backup. +
