Tom Lane wrote:
> "Thomas Hallgren" <thhal@mailblocks.com> writes:
> > Ideally, I'd like a "beforeCompletion" that is executed prior to the start
> > of the commit process and a "afterCompletion" that is called when the
> > transaction is commited. The latter would have a status flag indicating if
> > status is "prepared" (to support 2-phase commits), "commited", or "rolled
> > back".
>
> And what exactly would this callback do?
>
> The transaction commit sequence is sufficiently delicate that I'm not
> interested in any proposals to call random user-written code in it.
> The notion of a post-commit callback is even more problematic --- what
> is it going to do at all? It cannot modify the database, and it cannot
> do anything that risks getting an error, which seems to leave mighty
> little scope for useful activity.
Why can't we call the callback before we commit so it can modify the
database?
-- Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us pgman@candle.pha.pa.us | (610)
359-1001+ If your life is a hard drive, | 13 Roberts Road + Christ can be your backup. | Newtown Square,
Pennsylvania19073