>> The query is piggy backed on the same connection to PostgreSQL opend
>> by user (pgpool-II cannot issue "sync" because it closes the
>> transaction, which in turn closes user's unnamed portal).
>
> This argument (and usage) seems pretty broken. If you don't issue
> sync then how do you know you've gotten all of the command's output?
>
> If you're issuing a flush instead, maybe we could consider whether it's
> reasonable to do an extra pgstat_report_activity() upon receipt of a
> flush message. But -1 for putting it into the normal control flow.
Pgpool-II issues "flush" of course.
Best regards,
--
Tatsuo Ishii
SRA OSS, Inc. Japan
English: http://www.sraoss.co.jp/index_en.php
Japanese: http://www.sraoss.co.jp
