|
Ok thanks Tom,
My understanding from your last comment:
Since prepared statements and server cursors use different name spaces, it's save to use the same name as in
PQprepare(pgConn, "cu1", "declare cu1 cursor for ... ", ... )
Seb
From: Tom Lane <tgl@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Tuesday, April 9, 2024 6:36 PM To: Sebastien Flaesch <sebastien.flaesch@xxxxxxx> Cc: pgsql-general <pgsql-general@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> Subject: Re: prepared statement "cu1" already exists (but it does not) EXTERNAL: Do not click links or open attachments if you do not recognize the sender.
Sebastien Flaesch <sebastien.flaesch@xxxxxxx> writes: >>> Is it an issue if I use the same name for a prepared statement and the server cursor? I mean: >> From memory, I think those share the same "portal" namespace. > Can you please elaborate? > Is it supported to do: > PQprepare(pgConn, "cu1", "declare cu1 cursor for ... ", ... ) > PQexecPrepared(pgConn, "cu1", ... ) > ? > So far this has always worked. Ah, sorry, what I should have said is that the SQL PREPARE command works with the same namespace as PQprepare (which is a thin wrapper over the wire-protocol Parse command). There is a different namespace for cursors. Cursors do share that namespace with the wire-protocol "portal" concept, but libpq doesn't directly expose portals. regards, tom lane |
