Alvaro Herrera wrote: > 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?
Yea, that is consistent with what we do with other functions. -- Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://momjian.us EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com + If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your backup. + -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
