2010/3/1 Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>:
> On Sat, Feb 20, 2010 at 4:41 PM, Merlin Moncure <mmoncure(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>> IMNSHO, an 'in core' scheduler would be useful. however, I think
>> before you tackle a scheduler, we need proper stored procedures. Our
>> existing functions don't cut it because you can manage the transaction
>> state yourself.
> Did you mean that you "can't" manage the transaction state yourself?
> Has anyone given any thought to what would be required to relax this
> restriction? Is this totally impossible given our architecture, or
> just a lack of round tuits?
I thing so it is very hard restriction based on using and architecture
of our SPI interface. Our stored procedures are executed inside one
SELECT statement - it is reason for limit. There cannot be two or more
outer transactions. Different implementations has different place of
runtime - it is more near to top of pipeline.
> See also: http://www.postgresql.org/docs/current/static/plpgsql-porting.html#PLPGSQL-PORTING-EXCEPTIONS
> Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org)
> To make changes to your subscription:
In response to
pgsql-hackers by date
|Next:||From: Josh Berkus||Date: 2010-03-01 22:32:01|
|Subject: Re: Re: Hot Standby query cancellation and Streaming Replication
|Previous:||From: Robert Haas||Date: 2010-03-01 21:43:41|
|Subject: Re: scheduler in core|