Re: Autonomous Transaction (WIP)

From: Craig Ringer <craig(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
To: Pavan Deolasee <pavan(dot)deolasee(at)gmail(dot)com>, Rajeev rastogi <rajeev(dot)rastogi(at)huawei(dot)com>
Cc: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Greg Stark <stark(at)mit(dot)edu>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Autonomous Transaction (WIP)
Date: 2014-04-09 06:56:27
Message-ID: 5344EF1B.1020309@2ndquadrant.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On 04/09/2014 02:44 PM, Pavan Deolasee wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 9, 2014 at 11:03 AM, Rajeev rastogi
> <rajeev(dot)rastogi(at)huawei(dot)com <mailto:rajeev(dot)rastogi(at)huawei(dot)com>> wrote:
>
>
> Though autonomous transaction uses mixed approach of sub-transaction
> as well as main
> transaction, transaction state of autonomous transaction is handled
> independently.
>
>
> Whenever I was asked to have a look at implementing this feature, I
> always wondered about the great amount of global state that a backend
> maintains which is normally tied to a single top transaction. Since AT
> will have same characteristics as a top level transaction, I wonder how
> do you plan to separate those global state variables ? Sure, we can
> group them in a structure and put them on a stack when an AT starts and
> pop them off when the original top transaction becomes active again,
> finding all such global state variables is going to be tricky.

... not to mention the fact that extensions may rely on having their own
global state.

--
Craig Ringer http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Heikki Linnakangas 2014-04-09 07:03:51 Re: Autonomous Transaction (WIP)
Previous Message Hannu Krosing 2014-04-09 06:55:27 Re: Autonomous Transaction (WIP)