Re: [PATCH] Add additional extended protocol commands to psql: \parse and \bindx
От | Peter Eisentraut |
---|---|
Тема | Re: [PATCH] Add additional extended protocol commands to psql: \parse and \bindx |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 20476f68-26e4-4a3b-b2e6-1c7554359fe8@eisentraut.org обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: [PATCH] Add additional extended protocol commands to psql: \parse and \bindx (Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>) |
Ответы |
Re: [PATCH] Add additional extended protocol commands to psql: \parse and \bindx
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On 13.06.25 04:56, Michael Paquier wrote: > On Thu, Jun 12, 2025 at 09:53:13PM -0400, Greg Sabino Mullane wrote: >> On Thu, Jun 12, 2025 at 9:14 AM Peter Eisentraut <peter@eisentraut.org> >> wrote: >>> And this is not something users ever see, so the connection would not be >>> obvious. Maybe this should be called something more specific like >>> \close_stmt. >> >> Maybe just \closeprepared ? > > I'm OK with a rename if people feel strongly about it and we still > have the time to do tweaks like that, but I don't like the suggestions > \close_stmt and \closeprepared, because that's inconsistent with the > other new meta-commands. > > What about \close_named to be consistent with \bind_named? We always > require a statement name when closing a prepared statement. That doesn't address the concern that it's confusing what kind of object \close operates on. There are named and unnamed cursors (= portals), after all.
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: