Re: Slowness of extended protocol

>
> I'm not going to respond to the part about dealing with prepared
>> statements errors, since I think we've already covered that and there's
>> nothing new being said. I don't find automatic savepointing acceptable, and
>> a significant change of the PostgreSQL protocol to support this doesn't
>> seem reasonable (but you can try proposing).
>>
>
> As mentioned before. JDBC is not the only postgres driver to do this the
> ODBC driver does this as well. This is a requested feature by users. We
> didn't just decide to do it on our own.
>
> One thing to keep in mind is that both JDBC and ODBC are not exclusively
> PostgreSQL drivers and as such we sometimes have to jump through hoops to
> provide the semantics requested by the API.
>

I don't have anything in particular against automatic savepointing when
requested directly by users (especially if it's opt-in). My problem is more
with automatic savepointing as a solution to a problem created by doing
automatic prepared statements... Way too much automatic stuff going on
there for my taste...