| From: | Pavan Deolasee <pavan(dot)deolasee(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | 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 06:44:06 |
| Message-ID: | CABOikdN-gejf=jyufqz3_Vn8k6yzu9a42A52NXNM=_4vQbX-ng@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, Apr 9, 2014 at 11:03 AM, Rajeev rastogi
<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.
Thanks,
Pavan
--
Pavan Deolasee
http://www.linkedin.com/in/pavandeolasee
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Hannu Krosing | 2014-04-09 06:55:27 | Re: Autonomous Transaction (WIP) |
| Previous Message | Ashutosh Bapat | 2014-04-09 06:42:36 | Pointer to structure in ECPG |