| From: | Rajeev rastogi <rajeev(dot)rastogi(at)huawei(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Cc: | Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
| Subject: | Re: Autonomous Transaction is back |
| Date: | 2015-07-30 09:55:11 |
| Message-ID: | BF2827DCCE55594C8D7A8F7FFD3AB7715990AAC6@szxeml521-mbs.china.huawei.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 28 July 2015 03:21, Josh Berkus Wrote:
On 07/27/2015 02:47 AM, Rajeev rastogi wrote:
>>> Why have any fixed maximum?
>> Since we are planning to have nested autonomous transaction, so it is required to have limit on this so that resources can be controlled.
>Is there a particular reason why this limit wouldn't just be max_stack_depth?
We will require to allocate some initial resources in order to handle all nested autonomous transaction.
So I think it is better to have some different configuration parameter.
Thanks and Regards,
Kumar Rajeev Rastogi
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Heikki Linnakangas | 2015-07-30 10:15:56 | Re: Configurable location for extension .control files |
| Previous Message | Heikki Linnakangas | 2015-07-30 08:21:58 | Re: multivariate statistics / patch v7 |