On Fri, Mar 19, 2021 at 11:02:29PM +0100, Gilles Darold wrote: > Le 12/03/2021 à 06:55, Julien Rouhaud a écrit : > > > > I don't think we need to pass any information at least for the rollback > at statement level extension. All information needed are accessible and > actually at abort_current_transaction_hook we only toggle a boolean to > fire the rollback.
That's what I thought but I wanted to be sure. So, I have nothing more to say about the patch itself. At that point, I guess that we can't keep postponing that topic, and we should either: - commit this patch, or Álvaro's one based on a new grammar keyword for BEGIN (maybe without the GUC if that's the only hard blocker), assuming that there aren't any technical issue with those - reject this patch, and I guess set in stone that vanilla postgres will never allow that. Given the situation I'm not sure if I should mark the patch as Ready for Committer or not. I'll leave it as-is for now as Álvaro is already in Cc. > I have rebased the patch. Thanks!
