| From: | Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> |
|---|---|
| To: | Steve Singer <ssinger_pg(at)sympatico(dot)ca> |
| Cc: | Jan Urbański <wulczer(at)wulczer(dot)org>, Postgres - Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: pl/python explicit subtransactions |
| Date: | 2011-02-09 22:22:04 |
| Message-ID: | 1297290124.23596.10.camel@vanquo.pezone.net |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On tis, 2011-02-08 at 00:32 -0500, Steve Singer wrote:
> On 11-02-06 11:40 AM, Jan Urbański wrote:
>
> > PFA an updated patch with documentation.
>
> > Yeah, changed them.
>
> Those changes look fine. The tests now pass.
>
> I've attached a new version of the patch that fixes a few typos/wording
> issues I saw in the documentation. I also changed the link to the
> python reference manual section on context managers. I think it is
> better to link to that versus the original PEP.
>
> The documentation could probably still use more word-smithing but that
> can happen later. I'm marking this as ready for a committer.
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.
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Jeff Davis | 2011-02-09 22:58:49 | Re: Range Types - efficiency |
| Previous Message | Chris Browne | 2011-02-09 21:23:12 | Re: postponing some large patches to 9.2 |