Re: autonomous transactions

From: "Pavel Stehule" <pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: "Simon Riggs" <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
Cc: "Alvaro Herrera" <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com>, "Neil Conway" <neilc(at)samurai(dot)com>, "Roberts, Jon" <Jon(dot)Roberts(at)asurion(dot)com>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: autonomous transactions
Date: 2008-01-23 09:05:50
Message-ID: 162867790801230105s4f66763fieb82611df596ecb2@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On 23/01/2008, Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> wrote:
> On Tue, 2008-01-22 at 20:53 +0100, Pavel Stehule wrote:
> > >
> > > Agreed. I think Pavel Stehule was doing some experiments with them, I
> > > don't know if he got anywhere.
> > >
> >
> > I did only first research. Any hack is possible - you can stack
> > current transaction, but real implementation needs similar work like
> > nested transaction :( and it is too low level for me. And some code
> > cleaning is necessary. There are global variables.
> >
> > And there is most important question about data visibility - is
> > autonomous transaction independent on main transaction (isolation)?
> > You have to thing about deadlock, about reference integrity, etc. This
> > task isn't simple.
>
> Yes, I think autonomous transactions should be on the TODO. They're
> useful for
> - error logging
> - auditing
> - creating new partitions automatically
>

I worked on workflow implementation only in stored procedures. Without
autonomous transaction you cannot implement some models. And it's
usable for AQ.

> Plus I think we'd be able to improve the code for CREATE INDEX under
> HOT, and probably a few other wrinkly bits of code.
>
> --
> Simon Riggs
> 2ndQuadrant http://www.2ndQuadrant.com
>
>

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Gregory Stark 2008-01-23 09:30:54 Re: autonomous transactions
Previous Message Neil Conway 2008-01-23 08:26:52 Re: autonomous transactions