<p dir="ltr"><p dir="ltr">On 4 Oct. 2016 15:15, "Michael Paquier" <<a
href="mailto:michael.paquier@gmail.com">michael.paquier@gmail.com</a>>wrote:<br /> ><br /> > On Mon, Oct 3,
2016at 11:52 PM, Daniel Verite <<a href="mailto:daniel@manitou-mail.org">daniel@manitou-mail.org</a>> wrote:<br
/>> > Wouldn't pgbench benefit from it?<br /> > > It was mentioned some time ago [1], in relationship to
the<br/> > > \into construct, how client-server latency was important enough to<br /> > > justify the use
ofa "\;" separator between statements, to send them<br /> > > as a group.<br /> > ><br /> > > But
withthe libpq batch API, maybe this could be modernized<br /> > > with meta-commands like this:<br /> > >
\startbatch<br/> > > ...<br /> > > \endbatch<br /> ><br /> > Or just \batch [on|off], which
soundslike a damn good idea to me for<br /> > some users willing to test some workloads before integrating it in
an<br/> > application.<p dir="ltr">A batch jsnt necessarily terminated by a commit, so I'm more keen on start/end
batch.It's more in line with begin/commit. Batch is not only a mode, you also have to delineate batches.<br />