On 2015-08-25 14:12:37 -0400, Tom Lane wrote: > How would they have done that without major code surgery? We don't have > any hooks or function pointers involved in the users of resowner.h. > Certainly locks would not be getting passed to a nonstandard resowner.
CurrentResourceOwner = myresowner; /* do some op */ ... ? > > Say because they want to > > perform some operation and then release the locks without finishing the > > transaction. Adding a zero argument > > LockReleaseCurrentOwner()/LockReassignCurrentOwner() wrapper seems like > > a small enough effort to simply not bother looking for existing callers. > > I agree that a wrapper is possible, but it's not without cost; both as to > the time required to modify the patch, and as to possibly complicating > future back-patching because the code becomes gratuitously different in > the back branches. I really don't see that a wrapper is appropriate here. Works for me. -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
