From: | Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org, Thomas Hallgren <thhal(at)mailblocks(dot)com>, Guy Decoux <ts(at)moulon(dot)inra(dot)fr> |
Subject: | Re: Sketch of extending error handling for subtransactions in functions |
Date: | 2004-07-29 14:44:16 |
Message-ID: | 200407291644.16342.peter_e@gmx.net |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Am Sonntag, 25. Juli 2004 01:48 schrieb Tom Lane:
> One issue is that it may break existing PLs that override Warn_restart,
> since the semantics of doing that will have changed a bit. We can
> easily fix the PLs that are in our own CVS, but what are the
> implications for other PLs such as PL/R and PL/SH? Joe, Peter, any
> comments?
PL/sh is OK, but both PL/Ruby and PL/Java play around with Warn_restart.
> I am somewhat tempted to rename the setjmp variable Warn_restart to
> something else, so as to catch any code that is still expecting the
> old behavior (besides, it was never a very good name anyway). On the
> other hand, there may be cases where a PL's code doesn't actually need
> to change, and if so a rename would just break it unnecessarily. Any
> votes which way to jump?
Maybe the authors (in Cc) can comment what support they need.
--
Peter Eisentraut
http://developer.postgresql.org/~petere/
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2004-07-29 14:47:55 | Re: Sketch of extending error handling for subtransactions in functions |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2004-07-29 14:12:22 | Re: more signals (was: Function to kill backend) |