From: | Joe Conway <mail(at)joeconway(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | Neil Conway <neilc(at)samurai(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Where to call SetQuerySnapshot |
Date: | 2002-10-08 00:53:44 |
Message-ID: | 3DA22C98.5040908@joeconway.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Tom Lane wrote:
> 1. Where is the cleanest place to call SetQuerySnapshot() for utility
> statements that need it? Should we follow the lead of the existing
> COPY code, and add the call to the ExecuteStmt case in utility.c?
> Or should we move the calls into the command-specific routines (DoCopy
> and ExecuteQuery)? Or perhaps it should be done in postgres.c, which
> has this responsibility for non-utility statements?
Without looking at it too closely, I would think postgres.c would be best,
unless there is a legit reason for a utility statement to *not* want
SetQuerySnapshot called. If that's the case, then utility.c seems to make sense.
> 2. Would it be a good idea to change CopyQuerySnapshot to elog(ERROR)
> instead of silently creating a snapshot when none has been made?
> I think I was the one who put in its auto-create-snapshot behavior,
> but I'm now feeling like that was a mistake. It hides omissions that
> we should want to find.
Is an assert appropriate?
Joe
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2002-10-08 01:08:20 | Re: inline newNode() |
Previous Message | Neil Conway | 2002-10-08 00:42:17 | Re: Dirty Buffer Writing [was Proposed LogWriter Scheme] |