PL/Python: Add cursor and execute methods to plan object

On 2/25/17 1:27 PM, Peter Eisentraut wrote:

Something that has been bothering me in PL/Python for a long time is the
non-object-oriented way in which plans are prepared and executed:

plan = plpy.prepare(...)
res = plpy.execute(plan, ...)

where plpy.execute() takes either a plan or a query string.

I think a better style would be

plan = plpy.prepare(...)
res = plan.execute(...)

so that the "plan" is more like a statement handle that one finds in
other APIs.

This ended up being very easy to implement, so I'm proposing to allow
this new syntax as an alternative.

I came across this again as I was developing the background sessions API
for PL/Python. So I'm also wondering here which style people prefer so
I can implement it there.

This patch applies cleanly at cccbdde.

Any Python folks out there who would like to take a crack at reviewing this?

--
-David
david@pgmasters.net

--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers

On 03/16/2017 05:32 PM, David Steele wrote:

On 2/25/17 1:27 PM, Peter Eisentraut wrote:

Something that has been bothering me in PL/Python for a long time is the
non-object-oriented way in which plans are prepared and executed:

plan = plpy.prepare(...)
res = plpy.execute(plan, ...)

where plpy.execute() takes either a plan or a query string.

I think a better style would be

plan = plpy.prepare(...)
res = plan.execute(...)

so that the "plan" is more like a statement handle that one finds in
other APIs.

This ended up being very easy to implement, so I'm proposing to allow
this new syntax as an alternative.

I came across this again as I was developing the background sessions API
for PL/Python. So I'm also wondering here which style people prefer so
I can implement it there.

This patch applies cleanly at cccbdde.

Any Python folks out there who would like to take a crack at reviewing this?

I'm not particularly a Python folk, but I've done enough over the years
with PLs, including PLPython, that I think I can review this :-)

cheers

andrew

--
Andrew Dunstan https://www.2ndQuadrant.com
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services

--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers

On 03/21/2017 06:27 PM, Andrew Dunstan wrote:

On 03/16/2017 05:32 PM, David Steele wrote:

On 2/25/17 1:27 PM, Peter Eisentraut wrote:

Something that has been bothering me in PL/Python for a long time is the
non-object-oriented way in which plans are prepared and executed:

plan = plpy.prepare(...)
res = plpy.execute(plan, ...)

where plpy.execute() takes either a plan or a query string.

I think a better style would be

plan = plpy.prepare(...)
res = plan.execute(...)

so that the "plan" is more like a statement handle that one finds in
other APIs.

This ended up being very easy to implement, so I'm proposing to allow
this new syntax as an alternative.

I came across this again as I was developing the background sessions API
for PL/Python. So I'm also wondering here which style people prefer so
I can implement it there.

This patch applies cleanly at cccbdde.

Any Python folks out there who would like to take a crack at reviewing this?

I'm not particularly a Python folk, but I've done enough over the years
with PLs, including PLPython, that I think I can review this :-)

This is a very simple patch that does what it advertises. It applies
cleanly and provides tests for both the new methods (plan.cursor and
plan.execute).

Marking Ready For Committer.

cheers

andrew

--
Andrew Dunstan https://www.2ndQuadrant.com
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services

--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers

On 2/25/17 10:27 AM, Peter Eisentraut wrote:

So I'm also wondering here which style people prefer so
I can implement it there.

I think the more OO style is definitely better. I expect it would
simplify the code as well.
--
Jim C. Nasby, Data Architect jim@nasby.net
512.569.9461 (cell) http://jim.nasby.net

--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers

Jim Nasby <jim@nasby.net> writes:

On 2/25/17 10:27 AM, Peter Eisentraut wrote:

So I'm also wondering here which style people prefer so
I can implement it there.

I think the more OO style is definitely better. I expect it would
simplify the code as well.

I'm not a Python person, but I'd argue that the "more OO" style should
be the primary style documented, and the old style should just be
mentioned for reference.

- ilmari

--
- Twitter seems more influential [than blogs] in the 'gets reported in
the mainstream press' sense at least. - Matt McLeod
- That'd be because the content of a tweet is easier to condense down
to a mainstream media article. - Calle Dybedahl

--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers

On 3/22/17 11:46, Andrew Dunstan wrote:

This is a very simple patch that does what it advertises. It applies
cleanly and provides tests for both the new methods (plan.cursor and
plan.execute).

Marking Ready For Committer.

committed

--
Peter Eisentraut http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services

--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers