On Wed, Oct 21, 2026 at 9:02 PM Amit Langote <[email protected]> wrote: > Thanks for the patch. I'm going to study it and post an updated > version tomorrow. I'd like to handle errors as well as Lucas's patch > does but I'd stick to using PG_TRY in all the branches instead of > resowner in some and PG_TRY in others. I believe subtransaction > aborts are handled correctly by PG_TRY-based solution but I'd need to > test that. In any case, I want to avoid hash table and resowner calls > in the per-row path and keep the tracking code as minimal as possible.
Sorry, ran out of time today, so will post the patch tomorrow. -- Thanks, Amit Langote
