| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> |
| Cc: | Rick Otten <rottenwindfish(at)gmail(dot)com>, ronan(dot)dunklau(at)dalibo(dot)com, PostgreSQL mailing lists <pgsql-bugs(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Subject: | Re: your mail |
| Date: | 2017-08-08 21:12:14 |
| Message-ID: | 17591.1502226734@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-bugs |
Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> writes:
> On 2017-08-08 16:15:15 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
>> I don't see much of a way to do that in the "typical" case where
>> the library load happens as a result of a SQL command. You can't
>> just say "oh, we're not in a transaction" and then later "wait,
>> yes we are".
> Transaction seems hard, but setting CurrentMemoryContext = NULL during
> library load seems quite possible. And that'll cause a lot of code that
> assumes an in-progress transaction to fail.
And it would cause a lot of code that *doesn't* assume that to fail,
too. That has basically nothing to do with not being in a transaction,
so I don't think it would be helpful here.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Andres Freund | 2017-08-08 21:19:41 | Re: your mail |
| Previous Message | Andres Freund | 2017-08-08 20:18:38 | Re: your mail |