Re: BUG #5066: plperl issues with perl_destruct() and END blocks - Mailing list pgsql-bugs

From Alvaro Herrera
Subject Re: BUG #5066: plperl issues with perl_destruct() and END blocks
Date
Msg-id 20090921160630.GF29793@alvh.no-ip.org
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: BUG #5066: plperl issues with perl_destruct() and END blocks  (David Fetter <david@fetter.org>)
Responses Re: BUG #5066: plperl issues with perl_destruct() and END blocks  (David Fetter <david@fetter.org>)
Re: BUG #5066: plperl issues with perl_destruct() and END blocks  (Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>)
List pgsql-bugs
David Fetter escribió:

> Taken literally, that would mean, "the last action before the backend
> exits," but at least to me, that sounds troubling for the same reasons
> that "end of transaction" triggers do.  What happens when there are
> two different END blocks in a session?

The manual is clear that both are executed.

> With connection poolers, backends can last quite awhile.  Is it OK for
> the END block to run hours after the rest of the code?

This is an interesting point -- should END blocks be called on DISCARD ALL?

--
Alvaro Herrera                                http://www.CommandPrompt.com/
PostgreSQL Replication, Consulting, Custom Development, 24x7 support

pgsql-bugs by date:

Previous
From: David Fetter
Date:
Subject: Re: BUG #5066: plperl issues with perl_destruct() and END blocks
Next
From: Bruce Momjian
Date:
Subject: Re: BUG #5053: domain constraints still leak