Thread: nested transactions

Hackers,

Here is my current patch implementing nested transactions.

At this point I'd like some actual testing.  If you have any use for
this please test it and tell me how it behaves for you.  Report any
annoyances.

Still missing:
- deal with deferred triggers.
- do something with catcache reference counting

Obvious bugs:
- I just noticed the commit handling of child transactions is wrong.  A
  concurrent backend could see as committed tuples that should be
  regarded as in progress. (Breaks both serializable and read committed
  isolation levels.)

subtrans.c should go into src/backend/access/transam/subtrans.c
subtrans.h should go into src/include/access/subtrans.h

--
Alvaro Herrera (<alvherre[a]dcc.uchile.cl>)
"Investigación es lo que hago cuando no sé lo que estoy haciendo"
(Wernher von Braun)

On Fri, May 14, 2004 at 04:41:06PM -0400, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> Hackers,
>
> Here is my current patch implementing nested transactions.

Turns out the patch is too big and the server won't publish it.

Meanwhile, Bruce has posted it as

ftp://candle.pha.pa.us/pub/postgresql/mypatches/nested.diff

Sorry for the inconvenience,

--
Alvaro Herrera (<alvherre[a]dcc.uchile.cl>)
"Everybody understands Mickey Mouse. Few understand Hermann Hesse.
Hardly anybody understands Einstein. And nobody understands Emperor Norton."

On Fri, 2004-05-14 at 17:40, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> Turns out the patch is too big and the server won't publish it.

Is there a good reason for keeping this size limit on the -patches list?

-Neil

Neil Conway <neilc@samurai.com> writes:
> On Fri, 2004-05-14 at 17:40, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
>> Turns out the patch is too big and the server won't publish it.

> Is there a good reason for keeping this size limit on the -patches list?

I think Marc was more or less forced into lowering the size limit to
keep the lists from being flooded with viruses.

            regards, tom lane