On 4 Oct. 2016 15:15, "Michael Paquier" <michael.paqu...@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Mon, Oct 3, 2016 at 11:52 PM, Daniel Verite <dan...@manitou-mail.org> wrote: > > Wouldn't pgbench benefit from it? > > It was mentioned some time ago [1], in relationship to the > > \into construct, how client-server latency was important enough to > > justify the use of a "\;" separator between statements, to send them > > as a group. > > > > But with the libpq batch API, maybe this could be modernized > > with meta-commands like this: > > \startbatch > > ... > > \endbatch > > Or just \batch [on|off], which sounds like a damn good idea to me for > some users willing to test some workloads before integrating it in an > application.
A batch jsnt necessarily terminated by a commit, so I'm more keen on start/end batch. It's more in line with begin/commit. Batch is not only a mode, you also have to delineate batches.
