Re: Code checks for App Devs, using new options for transaction behavior

From: Dilip Kumar <dilipbalaut(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Simon Riggs <simon(dot)riggs(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>
Cc: Erik Rijkers <er(at)xs4all(dot)nl>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Code checks for App Devs, using new options for transaction behavior
Date: 2022-10-31 10:53:54
Message-ID: CAFiTN-u_7HuH+_aedty-VV=1qDuFj0QMbduAJYUVOfHHCBt9Fg@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Sun, Oct 30, 2022 at 11:32 PM Simon Riggs
<simon(dot)riggs(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> wrote:
>
> On Fri, 28 Oct 2022 at 10:33, Simon Riggs <simon(dot)riggs(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> wrote:
>
> > Thanks for the feedback, I will make all of those corrections in the
> > next version.
>
> New version attached. I've rolled 002-004 into one patch, but can
> split again as needed.

I like the idea of "parse only" and "nested xact", thanks for working
on this. I will look into patches in more detail, especially nested
xact. IMHO there is no point in merging "nested xact" and "rollback on
commit". They might be changing the same code location but these two
are completely different ideas, in fact all these three should be
reviewed as three separate threads as you mentioned in the first email
in the thread.

--
Regards,
Dilip Kumar
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Jehan-Guillaume de Rorthais 2022-10-31 10:59:54 Commitfest documentation
Previous Message Bharath Rupireddy 2022-10-31 10:51:06 Re: heavily contended lwlocks with long wait queues scale badly