Re: Unexpected results from CALL and AUTOCOMMIT=off - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Tom Lane
Subject Re: Unexpected results from CALL and AUTOCOMMIT=off
Date
Msg-id 584365.1717533094@sss.pgh.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Unexpected results from CALL and AUTOCOMMIT=off  (Nathan Bossart <nathandbossart@gmail.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
Nathan Bossart <nathandbossart@gmail.com> writes:
> On Tue, Jun 04, 2024 at 02:28:43PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
>> Hence, new patch attached, now with docs and tests.  Barring
>> objections I'll push this one.

> Should we expand the documentation for SPI_connect_ext() to note that
> SPI_execute_extended()/SPI_execute_plan_extended() depend on the flag?

Perhaps.  They already did, in that the atomic flag was taken into
account while deciding how to handle a nested CALL; basically what this
fix does is to make sure that the snapshot handling is done the same
way.  I think that what I added to the docs is probably sufficient,
but I'll yield to majority opinion if people think not.

            regards, tom lane



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Nathan Bossart
Date:
Subject: Re: Unexpected results from CALL and AUTOCOMMIT=off
Next
From: Nathan Bossart
Date:
Subject: Re: In-placre persistance change of a relation