> Robert Haas <robertmh...@gmail.com> writes: >> EDB has an implementation of this in Advanced Server. A stored >> procedure can issue a COMMIT, which commits the current transaction >> and begins a new one. This might or might not be what people are >> imagining for this feature. If we end up doing something else, one >> thing to consider is the impact on third-party tools like PGPOOL, >> which currently keep track of whether or not a transaction is in >> progress by snooping on the stream of SQL commands. If a procedure >> can be started with no transaction in progress and return with one >> open, or the other way around, that method will break horribly. >> That's not necessarily a reason not to do it, but I suspect we would >> want to add some kind of protocol-level information about the >> transaction state instead so that such tools could continue to work. > > Huh? There's been a transaction state indicator in the protocol since > 7.4 (see ReadyForQuery). It's not our problem if PGPOOL is still using > methods that were appropriate ten years ago.
Pgpool has been using the info since 2004 (7.4 was born in 2003). -- Tatsuo Ishii SRA OSS, Inc. Japan English: http://www.sraoss.co.jp/index_en.php Japanese: http://www.sraoss.co.jp -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
