Re: BUG #5066: plperl issues with perl_destruct() and END blocks

On Mon, Sep 21, 2009 at 01:06:17PM -0400, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> David Fetter escribió:
> > On Mon, Sep 21, 2009 at 12:06:30PM -0400, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> > > David Fetter escribió:
> > >
> > > > Taken literally, that would mean, "the last action before the
> > > > backend exits," but at least to me, that sounds troubling for
> > > > the same reasons that "end of transaction" triggers do.  What
> > > > happens when there are two different END blocks in a session?
> > >
> > > The manual is clear that both are executed.
> >
> > So it is, but does order matter, and if so, how would PostgreSQL
> > know?
>
> The fine manual saith
>
>     You may have multiple "END" blocks within a file--they will
>     execute in reverse order of definition; that is: last in, first
>     out (LIFO).
>
> But then, why would we care?  We just call the destructor and Perl
> ensures that the blocks are called in the right order.

This is not quite what I meant.  Let's say we have two or more different
PL/Perl functions executed over the course of a backend.  Which one's
END block gets executed last?  Do we need to warn people about this?
Generate a WARNING, even?

Cheers,
David.
--
David Fetter <david@fetter.org> http://fetter.org/
Phone: +1 415 235 3778  AIM: dfetter666  Yahoo!: dfetter
Skype: davidfetter      XMPP: david.fetter@gmail.com

Remember to vote!
Consider donating to Postgres: http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate