> Actually there is one more problem. The backend introduced the EXECUTE > command just recently. However, this clashes with the embedded SQL > EXECUTE command. Since both may be called just with EXECUTE <name>, > there is no way to distinguish them. > > I have no idea if there's a standard about execution of a plan but > couldn't/shouldn't it be named "EXECUTE PLAN" instead of just > "EXECUTE"?
I know this is not really related, but wouldn't the plan be to make ecpg actually use the backend side "execute ..." now that it is available ? ecpg needs eighter 'execute :idvar' or 'execute id', so either idvar is a declared variable or id a statement id. I don't know if that is something a parser can check though :-( For now, I would leave "exec sql execute" do the ecpg thing if that is possible. If you want to use the backend side functionality you would need to: exec sql prepare ex1 from 'execute id'; exec sql execute ex1; Andreas ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 6: Have you searched our list archives? http://archives.postgresql.org
