On Fri, 2008-03-28 at 14:32 -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote: > 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.
How about client_request() It's then clear that a request can be made up of many statements, which will be executed in turn. -- Simon Riggs 2ndQuadrant http://www.2ndQuadrant.com PostgreSQL UK 2008 Conference: http://www.postgresql.org.uk -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
