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!