Re: statement logging / extended query protocol issues
От | Oliver Jowett |
---|---|
Тема | Re: statement logging / extended query protocol issues |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 432AB2CC.9010307@opencloud.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: statement logging / extended query protocol issues (Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us>) |
Ответы |
Re: statement logging / extended query protocol issues
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Bruce Momjian wrote: > I think it is more verbose because no FETCH is logged in this type of > prepare/execute. The goal, I think, is for these type of queries to > look as similar to normal PREPARE/EXECUTE and DECLARE/FETCH as possible. I do not understand why this is a useful thing to do as part of log_statement. My point is that given JDBC code like this: Statement s = connection.createStatement(); ResultSet rs = s.executeQuery("SELECT * FROM pg_proc"); while (rs.next()){ // Process results } it seems that the least surprising thing to get logged is simply "SELECT * FROM pg_proc". I don't see how logging a synthetic PREPARE/EXECUTE/FETCH sequence (and DECLARE, now?) is useful. They're not necessarily syntactically correct, and they're certainly not queries that were actually sent to the backend. I thought log_statement was meant to answer the question "what queries were submitted to the backend?", rather than to provide a trace of protocol-level activity.. -O
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: