Re: BUG #5066: plperl issues with perl_destruct() and END blocks - Mailing list pgsql-bugs

From Robert Haas
Subject Re: BUG #5066: plperl issues with perl_destruct() and END blocks
Date
Msg-id 603c8f070909211019y3ad8b0bfw8a1a2c16ab2714fa@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: BUG #5066: plperl issues with perl_destruct() and END blocks  (Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@commandprompt.com>)
List pgsql-bugs
On Mon, Sep 21, 2009 at 12:06 PM, Alvaro Herrera
<alvherre@commandprompt.com> wrote:
> David Fetter escribi=F3:
>
>> 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. =A0What happens when there are
>> two different END blocks in a session?
>
> The manual is clear that both are executed.
>
>> With connection poolers, backends can last quite awhile. =A0Is it OK for
>> the END block to run hours after the rest of the code?
>
> This is an interesting point -- should END blocks be called on DISCARD AL=
L?

It seems pretty reasonable that it would.  The intention of DISCARD
ALL is to completely reset the entire session.

...Robert

pgsql-bugs by date:

Previous
From: Alvaro Herrera
Date:
Subject: Re: BUG #5066: plperl issues with perl_destruct() and END blocks
Next
From: Robert Haas
Date:
Subject: Re: BUG #5053: domain constraints still leak