Re: Transaction callback

From: Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Thomas Hallgren <thhal(at)mailblocks(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Transaction callback
Date: 2004-01-31 19:08:01
Message-ID: 200401311908.i0VJ81k17723@candle.pha.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Tom Lane wrote:
> "Thomas Hallgren" <thhal(at)mailblocks(dot)com> writes:
> > Ideally, I'd like a "beforeCompletion" that is executed prior to the start
> > of the commit process and a "afterCompletion" that is called when the
> > transaction is commited. The latter would have a status flag indicating if
> > status is "prepared" (to support 2-phase commits), "commited", or "rolled
> > back".
>
> And what exactly would this callback do?
>
> The transaction commit sequence is sufficiently delicate that I'm not
> interested in any proposals to call random user-written code in it.
> The notion of a post-commit callback is even more problematic --- what
> is it going to do at all? It cannot modify the database, and it cannot
> do anything that risks getting an error, which seems to leave mighty
> little scope for useful activity.

Why can't we call the callback before we commit so it can modify the
database?

--
Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us
pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us | (610) 359-1001
+ If your life is a hard drive, | 13 Roberts Road
+ Christ can be your backup. | Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message David Helgason 2004-01-31 19:23:43 Re: Transaction callback
Previous Message Tom Lane 2004-01-31 18:15:57 Kerberos as source of user name? (Re: segfault in psql on x86_64)