On 4/4/18 13:53, Tomas Vondra wrote:
>> Here is the same patch rewritten using SPI, using the new no_snapshots
>> facility recently introduced.
>
> Yeah, doing that using SPI seems much cleaner and more like the rest of
> the commands. Most of the patch is boilerplate to support the grammar,
> and
On 03/29/2018 06:30 PM, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> On 3/15/18 17:49, Alexander Korotkov wrote:
>> I didn't dig deeply into this subject. But should we rather teach SPI
>> to execute
>> utility statements without taking snapshot when not necessary. That seems
>> like what executor do for client pro
On 3/15/18 17:49, Alexander Korotkov wrote:
> I didn't dig deeply into this subject. But should we rather teach SPI
> to execute
> utility statements without taking snapshot when not necessary. That seems
> like what executor do for client provided queries. And that seems a bit
> unlogical
> tha
Hi!
On Wed, Feb 28, 2018 at 11:45 PM, Peter Eisentraut <
peter.eisentr...@2ndquadrant.com> wrote:
> Currently, you can't run SET TRANSACTION in PL/pgSQL. A normal SQL
> command run inside PL/pgSQL acquires a snapshot, but SET
> TRANSACTION does not work anymore if a snapsho
Currently, you can't run SET TRANSACTION in PL/pgSQL. A normal SQL
command run inside PL/pgSQL acquires a snapshot, but SET
TRANSACTION does not work anymore if a snapshot is set. Here is a patch
to work around that by handling this command separately. I have coded
this here bypassin
