| From: | Greg Stark <gsstark(at)mit(dot)edu> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Jan Urbański <wulczer(at)wulczer(dot)org>, Hannu Krosing <hannu(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Alex Hunsaker <badalex(at)gmail(dot)com>, Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>, Postgres - Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: why does plperl cache functions using just a bool for is_trigger |
| Date: | 2010-11-08 17:36:39 |
| Message-ID: | AANLkTiksQEPtgnFM1Y1TXqRuJ1viqBXJXVEGstcdY4dC@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Fri, Nov 5, 2010 at 2:56 PM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> It's not cheap :-( ... but it's *necessary*. There's no other way to
> get sane behavior.
>
> If the cost annoys you, you should put some effort into making subxact
> start/stop cheaper overall, rather than trying to avoid having one here.
I would be pretty happy even if only the *first* subxact was cheap.
That would take care of 99% of use implicit use cases leaving mostly
only cases where users have explicitly asked for a subxact with a
catch/throw block.
In particular it would cover the psql case of wanting to have a
subxact around every interactive command so the user can hit C-c
without undoing their whole transaction.
--
greg
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Hitoshi Harada | 2010-11-08 17:47:27 | Re: How to share the result data of separated plan |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2010-11-08 17:32:16 | Re: How to share the result data of separated plan |