From: | Dave Cramer <pg(at)fastcrypt(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | Laurenz Albe <laurenz(dot)albe(at)cybertec(dot)at>, Greg Nancarrow <gregn4422(at)gmail(dot)com>, David Rader <david(dot)rader(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-jdbc(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Procedure support improvements |
Date: | 2019-08-26 18:31:44 |
Message-ID: | CADK3HHLbnfG5TTuMyTt3CrS7nYvXxLhdwNBJt3sEp-053pbc=g@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers pgsql-jdbc |
On Mon, 26 Aug 2019 at 14:14, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> Laurenz Albe <laurenz(dot)albe(at)cybertec(dot)at> writes:
> > Dave Cramer wrote:
> > test=> BEGIN;
> > BEGIN
> > test=> CALL testproc();
> > ERROR: invalid transaction termination
> > CONTEXT: PL/pgSQL function testproc() line 1 at COMMIT
>
> > What is the rationale for this?
>
> A procedure shouldn't be able to force commit of the surrounding
> transaction.
>
> As Dave noted, what would be nicer is for procedures to be able
> to start and commit autonomous transactions, without affecting
> the state of the outer transaction. We haven't got that though,
> and it looks like a lot of work to get there.
>
I'm less than motivated to hack the driver to make something work here
until we finish the server feature.
Who knows what that might bring ?
Dave Cramer
davec(at)postgresintl(dot)com
www.postgresintl.com
>
>
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Jeff Davis | 2019-08-26 18:34:27 | Re: range_agg |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2019-08-26 18:14:50 | Re: Procedure support improvements |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Dave Cramer | 2019-08-27 10:39:33 | Re: Recommendations for PGBouncer interacting with HikariCP |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2019-08-26 18:14:50 | Re: Procedure support improvements |