Re: automatic restore point

From: Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
To: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
Cc: Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz>, "Yotsunaga, Naoki" <yotsunaga(dot)naoki(at)jp(dot)fujitsu(dot)com>, 'Postgres hackers' <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: automatic restore point
Date: 2018-10-10 21:09:23
Message-ID: 52f37192-099b-ae8f-40b9-c880d2cf9f41@2ndquadrant.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On 05/10/2018 15:26, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> It looked for a moment that
>
> isCompleteQuery = (context <= PROCESS_UTILITY_QUERY)
>
> in ProcessUtilitySlow() might be a problem, since that omits
> PROCESS_UTILITY_QUERY_NONATOMIC, but it's not actually a problem, since
> the commands that run this way (CALL and SET from PL/pgSQL) don't have
> event triggers. But anyway, I propose the attached patch to rephrase
> that. Also some tests that show it all works as expected.

I have committed these to master.

--
Peter Eisentraut http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Kevin Grittner 2018-10-10 21:14:54 Re: [HACKERS] SERIALIZABLE with parallel query
Previous Message Andres Freund 2018-10-10 20:57:19 Re: logical decoding bug when mapped relation with toast contents is rewritten repeatedly