Extend Spi's understanding of "readonly" to transaction #992
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Mucking with the pushing a new Snapshot if we *think* we've modified the database isn't correct. It can cause problems elsewhere within Postgres where Postgres expects the Portal's snapshot to be the same as when the Portal was created. The best I can see to do is just track "readonly" (renamed to `MUTABLE_MODE`) for the duration of the current transaction.
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Mucking with the pushing a new Snapshot if we think we've modified the database isn't correct. It can cause problems elsewhere within Postgres where Postgres expects the Portal's snapshot to be the same as when the Portal was created.
The best I can see to do is just track "readonly" (renamed to
MUTABLE_MODE) for the duration of the current transaction.This problem appeared while working on plrust, upgrading it to the pgx 'develop' branch.
I've spent almost 2 hours trying to come up with a test case for this, but as best I can tell, without actually implementing an actual language handler in pgx' test suite I can't see how to expose the underlying problem.
For now, the fact plrust works will have to be the test.