| From: | Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tomas Vondra <tomas(dot)vondra(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Alexander Korotkov <a(dot)korotkov(at)postgrespro(dot)ru> |
| Cc: | pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: SET TRANSACTION in PL/pgSQL |
| Date: | 2018-04-05 19:31:53 |
| Message-ID: | c4e14fa3-9548-52d4-b636-50d38e970e49@2ndquadrant.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 4/4/18 13:53, Tomas Vondra wrote:
>> Here is the same patch rewritten using SPI, using the new no_snapshots
>> facility recently introduced.
>
> Yeah, doing that using SPI seems much cleaner and more like the rest of
> the commands. Most of the patch is boilerplate to support the grammar,
> and the one interesting piece exec_stmt_set seems fine to me.
>
> Barring any objections, I'll mark it as RFC tomorrow morning.
You apparently didn't, but I committed it anyway. ;-)
--
Peter Eisentraut http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Bruce Momjian | 2018-04-05 19:33:14 | Re: PostgreSQL's handling of fsync() errors is unsafe and risks data loss at least on XFS |
| Previous Message | Andres Freund | 2018-04-05 19:25:04 | Re: [HACKERS] Restrict concurrent update/delete with UPDATE of partition key |