Re: [GENERAL] DECLARE CURSOR

From: Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: snpe <snpe(at)snpe(dot)co(dot)yu>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: [GENERAL] DECLARE CURSOR
Date: 2002-11-17 23:44:58
Message-ID: 200211172344.gAHNiwS09569@candle.pha.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general pgsql-hackers


Let's just fix it and roll an RC2 with the fix. If not, we can just fix
it in 7.3.1 but I see little problem in rolling an RC2.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Tom Lane wrote:
> snpe <snpe(at)snpe(dot)co(dot)yu> writes:
> > When I call DECLARE CURSOR out of transaction command success,
> > but cursor is not created
> > Reference manual say that this get error :
> > ERROR: DECLARE CURSOR may only be used in begin/end transaction blocks
>
> Oops. I removed that test on 21-Oct as part of this fix:
>
> 2002-10-21 18:06 tgl
>
> * src/: backend/access/transam/xact.c, backend/catalog/heap.c,
> backend/catalog/index.c, backend/commands/dbcommands.c,
> backend/commands/indexcmds.c, backend/commands/tablecmds.c,
> backend/commands/vacuum.c, backend/parser/analyze.c,
> include/access/xact.h: Fix places that were using
> IsTransactionBlock() as an (inadequate) check that they'd get to
> commit immediately on finishing. There's now a centralized routine
> PreventTransactionChain() that implements the necessary tests.
>
> My reasons for removing it were (a) it was in the wrong place (analyze.c
> is not the right place to test execution-time constraints), and (b) it
> was the wrong test: the test as written was just IsTransactionBlock(),
> which is wrong in the case of autocommit-off, since a DECLARE CURSOR
> will start a new transaction perfectly well. Another objection is that
> inside a function call, it ought to be legal to do DECLARE CURSOR even
> if we're not in a transaction block, since the function might intend to
> use the cursor itself before returning.
>
> I think I had intended to put together an alternative test that only
> complained about interactive DECLARE CURSOR and understood about
> autocommit, but I forgot.
>
> At this point we can either add the fixed-up error check (meaning RC1
> won't be the release after all), or change the documentation.
>
> Comments?
>
> regards, tom lane
>
> ---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
> TIP 2: you can get off all lists at once with the unregister command
> (send "unregister YourEmailAddressHere" to majordomo(at)postgresql(dot)org)
>

--
Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us
pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us | (610) 359-1001
+ If your life is a hard drive, | 13 Roberts Road
+ Christ can be your backup. | Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2002-11-17 23:58:02 Re: [GENERAL] DECLARE CURSOR
Previous Message Egyud Csaba 2002-11-17 21:09:08 Welcom & a problem

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2002-11-17 23:58:02 Re: [GENERAL] DECLARE CURSOR
Previous Message Bruce Momjian 2002-11-17 23:43:38 Re: CLUSTER ALL syntax