Re: pl/python explicit subtransactions
Jan Urbański <wulczer@wulczer.org>
From: Jan Urbański <wulczer@wulczer.org>
To: Steve Singer <ssinger_pg@sympatico.ca>
Cc: Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net>, Postgres - Hackers <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Date: 2011-02-10T10:20:06Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers
Attachments
- plpython-explicit-subxacts.diff (text/x-patch) patch
On 10/02/11 01:26, Steve Singer wrote: > On 11-02-09 05:22 PM, Peter Eisentraut wrote: >> On tis, 2011-02-08 at 00:32 -0500, Steve Singer wrote: >> Is it necessarily a good idea that an explicit subtransaction disables >> the implicit sub-subtransactions? It might be conceivable that you'd >> still want to do some try/catch within explicit subtransactions. >> > > I had tested nested subtransactions but not a normal try/catch within a > subtransaction. That sounds reasonable to allow. > > Unfortunately it leads to: > > [crash] D'oh, I was thinking about whether it's safe to skip the internal subxact if you're in an implicit one and somehow I always convinced myself that since you eventually close the explicit one, it is. Obviously my testing wasn't enough :( Attaching an updated patch with improved docs incorporating Steve's fixes, and fixes & tests for not statring the implicit subxact. That actually makes the patch a bit smaller ;) OTOH I had to remove the section from the docs that claimed performance improvement due to only starting the explicit subxact... Cheers, Jan