On Tue, Oct 28, 2014 at 7:26 PM, Robert Haas <robertmh...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Tue, Oct 28, 2014 at 7:22 PM, Jim Nasby <jim.na...@bluetreble.com> wrote: >> On 10/28/14, 3:48 PM, Simon Riggs wrote: >>> Given your description of pg_background it looks an awful lot like >>> infrastructure to make Autonomous Transactions work, but it doesn't >>> even do that. I guess it could do in a very small additional patch, so >>> maybe it is useful for something. >> >> What do you see as being missing for autonomous transactios? > > Personally, I don't see this patch set as having much to do with real > autonomous transactions. > >> BTW, what I think would make this feature VERY useful is if it provided the >> ability to fire something up in another backend and leave it running in the >> background. > > You *can* do that. I mean, long-running transactions will have their > usual problems, but if you want to kick off a long-running (or a > short-running query) in the background and forget about it, this patch > lets you do that.
Err, sorry. pg_background lets you do that, not this patch. -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
