Re: Add Pipelining support in psql - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Daniel Verite
Subject Re: Add Pipelining support in psql
Date
Msg-id a96682c3-9505-456f-b5c7-1b9d1e6303b4@manitou-mail.org
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Add Pipelining support in psql  (Anthonin Bonnefoy <anthonin.bonnefoy@datadoghq.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
    Anthonin Bonnefoy wrote:

> So if I understand correctly, you want to automatically convert a
> simple query into an extended query when we're within a pipeline. That
> would be doable with:
>
> --- a/src/bin/psql/common.c
> +++ b/src/bin/psql/common.c
> @@ -1668,7 +1668,16 @@ ExecQueryAndProcessResults(const char *query,
>                        }
>                        break;
>                case PSQL_SEND_QUERY:
> -                       success = PQsendQuery(pset.db, query);
> +                       if (PQpipelineStatus(pset.db) != PQ_PIPELINE_OFF) {
> +                               success = PQsendQueryParams(pset.db, query,
> +
> pset.bind_nparams, NULL,
> +                                                               (const
> char *const *) pset.bind_params,
> +                                                               NULL, NULL,
> 0);
> +                               if (success)
> +                                       pset.piped_commands++;
> +                       }
> +                       else
> +                               success = PQsendQuery(pset.db, query);
>                        break;
>        }

Yes, except that the bind parameters need to be cleared after this,
as done in clean_extended_state()

> I do see the idea to make it easier to convert existing scripts into
> using pipelining. The main focus of the initial implementation was
> more on protocol regression tests with psql, so that's not necessarily
> something I had in mind.

Understood. Yet pipelining can accelerate considerably certain scripts
when client-server latency is an issue. We should expect end users to
benefit from it too.

> I have some reservation as it will push all
> parameters in the query string which may not be the desired
> behaviour.

I don't follow. For me the change discussed here is about simplifying
the syntax when there is no out-of-query $N-style parameters, it does
not change anything for queries that actually use them, nor does
it forbid a \bind without parameters.


Best regards,
--
Daniel Vérité
https://postgresql.verite.pro/



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Andres Freund
Date:
Subject: Re: Incorrect result of bitmap heap scan.
Next
From: Sami Imseih
Date:
Subject: should num_custom_plans be reset after plan invalidation?