| From: | Fabien COELHO <coelho(at)cri(dot)ensmp(dot)fr> |
|---|---|
| To: | Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
| Cc: | pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: chained transactions |
| Date: | 2019-03-24 14:41:10 |
| Message-ID: | alpine.DEB.2.21.1903241535220.9939@lancre |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Hallo Peter,
>> In "xact.c", maybe I'd assign blockState in the else branch, instead of
>> overriding it?
>
> I think it was better the way it is, since logically the block state is
> first set, then set again after the new transaction starts.
Ok.
>> About the static _SPI_{commit,rollback} functions: I'm fine with these
>> functions, but I'm not sure about their name. Maybe
>> _SPI_chainable_{commit,rollback} would be is clearer about their content?
>
> I kept it as is, to mirror the names of the SQL commands.
Hmmm. Function _SPI_commit does not implement just COMMIT, it implements
both "COMMIT" and "COMMIT AND CHAIN"?
I'm fine with SPI_commit and SPI_commit_and_chain, and the rollback
variants.
Maybe _SPI_commit_chainable? Well, you do as you please.
--
Fabie
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Andres Freund | 2019-03-24 16:44:58 | Re: jsonpath |
| Previous Message | Fabien COELHO | 2019-03-24 14:34:33 | Re: CPU costs of random_zipfian in pgbench |