| From: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Gurjeet Singh <singh(dot)gurjeet(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | PGSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Reg Me Please <regmeplease(at)gmail(dot)com>, Albe Laurenz <laurenz(dot)albe(at)wien(dot)gv(dot)at>, Dennis Brakhane <brakhane(at)googlemail(dot)com>, pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Transactions within a function body |
| Date: | 2008-10-02 15:40:22 |
| Message-ID: | 20081002154022.GD4151@alvh.no-ip.org |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general pgsql-hackers |
Gurjeet Singh escribió:
> I have seen this feature being asked for, and this work-around suggested so
> many times. If plpgql does it internally, why not provide a clean interface
> for this? Is there some road-block, or that nobody has ever tried it?
Initially we aimed at just exposing SAVEPOINT and ROLLBACK TO in
functions, but ran into the problem that the SPI stack needs to be dealt
with appropriately and you can't do it if the user is able to modify it
arbitrarily by calling transaction-modifying commands. That's when the
EXCEPTION idea came up. We never went back and studied whether we could
have fixed the SPI limitation, but it's not trivial.
--
Alvaro Herrera http://www.CommandPrompt.com/
The PostgreSQL Company - Command Prompt, Inc.
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Bob Henkel | 2008-10-02 15:46:25 | Re: Transactions within a function body |
| Previous Message | Alvaro Herrera | 2008-10-02 15:37:37 | Re: Transactions within a function body |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Bob Henkel | 2008-10-02 15:46:25 | Re: Transactions within a function body |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2008-10-02 15:37:45 | Re: Block-level CRC checks |