Dave Page wrote:
>
> It's rumoured that Hiroshi Inoue once said:
> > Tom Lane wrote:
> >>
> >> "Dave Page" <dpage@vale-housing.co.uk> writes:
> >> > No, but with them we can avoid cluttering the wire protocol with
> >> > fields for all this, and the JDBC required data. With 2 numeric
> >> > columns (attrelid, attnum), any application/interface can query the
> >> > system catalogs easily for whatever extra info they like.
> >>
> >> This is my feeling also. We shouldn't try to guess in the protocol
> >> exactly what set of information will be wanted by a frontend; we
> >> should just provide the catalog keys needed to look up whatever is
> >> wanted.
> >
> > Does looking up by the catalog keys take no cost ?
>
> Obviously there is cost, but doing a lookup only on demand, has got to be
> cheaper in the long run than including the entire column definition in the
> message whether it's wanted or not?
So if there are 100 fields, should we ask the backend
the column name 100 times ?
regards,
Hiroshi Inouehttp://www.geocities.jp/inocchichichi/psqlodbc/