Re: pgsql: Drop unnamed portal immediately after execution to completion

Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> On Wed, Nov 5, 2025 at 12:43 AM Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz> wrote:
>> Drop unnamed portal immediately after execution to completion

> This patch doesn't look well-considered to me. One problem is that
> it's a wire protocol change to fix a minor logging anomaly, which
> seems disproportionate. Another problem is that the new portal-drop
> behavior is conditional on whether XACT_FLAGS_NEEDIMMEDIATECOMMIT gets
> set, which seems unprincipled. In addition to those points, I am not
> entirely certain that the "here is no need for it beyond this point"
> comment is correct. I mean, I think it will normally be true, but what
> if the client wants to send a Describe message after-the-fact, or an
> additional Execute message that will presumably return zero rows?

Yeah, the whole idea of changing the wire-level behavior to fix this
has been making me itch: I don't believe for a moment that it won't
cause compatibility problems. I do not have a better proposal for
fixing the problem though.

regards, tom lane