Tom Lane wrote:
> The real point here is that omitting the per-command subtransaction
> ought to be a hidden optimization, not something that intrudes to the
> point of having unclean semantics when we can't do it.
Sorry to be stupid here, but I didn't understand this when it was
disussed originally either. Why a subtransaction per command rather than
one per function? If I've got this right, this is so the PL can tidy up
behind itself and report/log an appropriate error?
In response to
pgsql-hackers by date
|Next:||From: Thomas Hallgren||Date: 2004-11-30 10:10:32|
|Subject: Re: Error handling in plperl and pltcl|
|Previous:||From: Johan Wehtje||Date: 2004-11-30 07:47:14|
|Subject: Re: Column n.nsptablespace does not exist error|