Re: [HACKERS] Transaction control in procedures - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Simon Riggs
Subject Re: [HACKERS] Transaction control in procedures
Date
Msg-id CANP8+jLpB=ozuRSmuFfP5G0ru-HL10=8v7OHL+7gnzLHPODo4g@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: [HACKERS] Transaction control in procedures  (Peter Eisentraut <peter.eisentraut@2ndquadrant.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
On 18 November 2017 at 02:16, Peter Eisentraut
<peter.eisentraut@2ndquadrant.com> wrote:
> On 11/16/17 18:35, Simon Riggs wrote:
>> For the first two answers above the answer was "currently executing
>> statement", yet the third answer seems to be the procedure. So that is
>> a slight discrepancy.
>
> That's the way function execution, or really any nested execution,
> currently works.

I'm impressed that these features are so clean and simple. I wasn't
expecting that. I have very few review comments.

I vote in favour of applying these patches at the end of this CF, end of 11/17.
* Procedures
* Transaction control in PL/pgSQL (only)

That will give us 3 months to discuss problems and find solutions,
then later we can commit PL/Python, PL/perl and PL/tcl once we know
where the dragons are hiding.

If we delay, we will end up with some weird gotcha that needs changing
in the next release.

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


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Thomas Munro
Date:
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] proposal - Default namespaces for XPath expressions(PostgreSQL 11)
Next
From: Michael Paquier
Date:
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Commits don't block for synchronous replication