Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Packages: Again

2017-01-11 21:08 GMT+01:00 Bruce Momjian <[email protected]>:
On Wed, Jan 11, 2017 at 08:56:23PM +0100, Fabien COELHO wrote:
> >I think we need to focus on things that _can't_ be done first, rather
> >than things that require porting, e.g. until we had savepoints, you
> >couldn't migrate an application that needed it.  It wasn't a question of
> >porting --- there was just no way to port it.
> >
> >Those _missing_ pieces should be a priority.
> Nested/autonomous transactions? Do they occur often in PL/SQL code?

Yes, they do based on the number of "I can't port from Oracle"
complaints we used to get, perhaps related to exceptions.  Once we had
them, the complaints of that type disappeared.

We have not PL controllable transactions - so some patterns are not available in our functions.

On second hand - currently all usage of explicit commit/rollback was related to some Oracle issue (what I know)

1. missing easy debug printing - there was not nothing like RAISE NOTICE - dbms_output - is poor solution

2. it was workaround for limited transaction size

In 90% it are solutions of issues that are not in Postgres. Can be nice to have procedures - and it can be benefit for all, but it is not too big gap. When you use postgres's patterns, then you don't need it - but there are more work with migration.



  Bruce Momjian  <[email protected]>
rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">

+ As you are, so once was I.  As I am, so you will be. +
+                      Ancient Roman grave inscription +

Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list ([email protected])
To make changes to your subscription:

Programming list archiving by: Enterprise Git Hosting