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 <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Sent: Tuesday, April 9, 2024 6:36 PM
To: Sebastien Flaesch <sebastien.flae...@4js.com>
Cc: pgsql-general <pgsql-general@lists.postgresql.org>
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.flae...@4js.com> 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
