| From: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, PostgreSQL Bugs <pgsql-bugs(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Bug in PL/pgSQL FOR cursor variant |
| Date: | 2010-06-21 21:59:25 |
| Message-ID: | 1277157470-sup-508@alvh.no-ip.org |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-bugs |
Excerpts from Heikki Linnakangas's message of lun jun 21 17:47:43 -0400 2010:
> Maybe it would be easier to somehow protect the portal then, and throw
> an error if you try to close it. We could just mark the portal as
> PORTAL_ACTIVE while we run the user statements, but that would also
> forbid fetching or moving it. I'm thinking of a new "pinned" state,
> which is like PORTAL_READY except that the portal can't be dropped like
> in PORTAL_ACTIVE state.
Why is it an error to close the portal? Maybe we should keep it closed
(i.e. don't free it), and error out only when it is accessed again.
--
Álvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com>
The PostgreSQL Company - Command Prompt, Inc.
PostgreSQL Replication, Consulting, Custom Development, 24x7 support
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Heikki Linnakangas | 2010-06-21 22:29:48 | Re: Bug in PL/pgSQL FOR cursor variant |
| Previous Message | Heikki Linnakangas | 2010-06-21 21:47:43 | Re: Bug in PL/pgSQL FOR cursor variant |