Thanks. 'connect to' cannot be sent to server as plain text, surely.
I'm stupid :-(
On 8/4/06, Stephan Szabo <sszabo@megazone.bigpanda.com> wrote:
>
> On Fri, 4 Aug 2006, Nikolay Samokhvalov wrote:
>
> > On 8/4/06, Nikolay Samokhvalov <samokhvalov@gmail.com> wrote:
> > [...]
> > > BTW, difference vanishes due to expression power of SQL -
> > > it supports session comands in the same context as DDL commands and
> > > data manipulation stmts (SQL:200n, 4.33.2.5 'SQL-connection
> > > statements').
> >
> > Sorry, I already see my failure. It is in the fact that Postgres
> > doesn't support that connection statements yet (but some connection
> > things are supported - like changing the CURRENT_ROLE).
> >
> > So, my previous message is interesting only from theoretical point of
> > view. I always try to thing in the manner of SQL standard or use
> > knowledge from books/university ...
> >
> > But the logic is clear, isn't it? Connection is not client operation.
>
> I'd read 4.39 differently which seems to imply that the SQL-client handles
> the connection statements.
>
--
Best regards,
Nikolay
