Tomas Doran wrote: > On 28 Mar 2008, at 17:23, Bruce Momjian wrote:
>> Perhaps we could name it received_query() to indicate it is what the >> backend received and it not necessarily the _current_ query. > > reveived_query() sounds like a very sane name for me, and documenting it > as such would allow you to expose the functionality without the possible > complaints... client_query perhaps? -- Alvaro Herrera http://www.CommandPrompt.com/ PostgreSQL Replication, Consulting, Custom Development, 24x7 support -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
