Thanks for the updated patch set.
I found a problem in 0019-transactional-variables.patch:
--- a/doc/src/sgml/catalogs.sgml
+++ b/doc/src/sgml/catalogs.sgml
@@ -9851,6 +9851,17 @@ SCRAM-SHA-256$<replaceable><iteration count></replaceable>:<replaceable>&l
</para></entry>
</row>
+ <row>
+ <entry><structfield>varistransact</structfield></entry>
+ <entry><type>boolean</type></entry>
+ <entry></entry>
+ <entry>
+ True, when the variable is "transactional". In case of transaction
+ rollback, transactional variables are reset to their content at the
+ transaction start. The default value is false.
+ </entry>
+ </row>
That's messed up; it should be
<row>
<entry role="catalog_table_entry"><para role="column_definition">
<structfield>varistransact</structfield> <type>boolean</type>
</para>
<para>
True, when the variable is <quote>transactional</quote>. In the case
of a transaction rollback, transactional variables are reset to the
value they had when the transaction started. The default value is
<literal>false</literal>.
</para></entry>
</row>
I have started reading through the first patch, and so far I have only found
language problems.
I wonder how I should go about this. At first, I intended to send an edited
version of the first patch, but as later patches depend on earlier patches,
that would mess up the patch set.
I can send my suggested modifications in text, but then you have to copy and
paste them all, which is cumbersome.
What would be best for you?
Thinking further, I wondered about the order of patches.
If some committer eventually takes mercy on this patch set, I expect that
only a part of the functionality will go in as a first step.
Does the order of the patches in the patch set match such a process?
I'd guess that temporary session variables or ON TRANSACTION END RESET
would be things that can be committed later on, but PL/pgSQL support
should be in the first commit.
What is your approach to that?
Yours,
Laurenz Albe