Re: PL/pgSQL bug? - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Tom Lane
Subject Re: PL/pgSQL bug?
Date
Msg-id 16453.997709920@sss.pgh.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to RE: PL/pgSQL bug?  ("Hiroshi Inoue" <Inoue@tpf.co.jp>)
Responses Re: PL/pgSQL bug?
List pgsql-hackers
"Hiroshi Inoue" <Inoue@tpf.co.jp> writes:
> It's possible for a function to use a unique snapshot
> if there are only SELECT statements in the function
> but it's impossible if there are UPDATE/DELETE or
> SELECT .. FOR UPDATE statements etc.

You are confusing snapshots (which determine visibility of the results
of OTHER transactions) with command-counter incrementing (which
determines visibility of the results of OUR OWN transaction).  I agree
that plpgsql's handling of command-counter changes is broken, but it
does not follow that sprinkling the code with SetQuerySnapshot is wise.
        regards, tom lane


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Jan Wieck
Date:
Subject: Re: Re: [PATCHES] Select parser at runtime
Next
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: Re: [PATCHES] Select parser at runtime