James William Pye
bool (*SPI_UtilityFilter) (NodeTag aStmt);
To a "void SPI_FilterUtilities(void *execPlan, SPI_UtilityFilter fp)".
Throwing an error if deemed necessary by the pointed to function.
After browsing the code a bit more, I realize that the above suggestion
is superior to my own. It
Tom Lane wrote:
... I would like to prevent the commands "begin [work or
transaction]", "commit", and "rollback", completely
If you are executing through SPI then those operations are disallowed
already.
Ah, yes I had forgotten that. One problem less to solve.
The main problem with this propo
James William Pye wrote:
Although, I'm inclined to think that if you require this sort of
flexibility you should probably think about writing your own SPI.
I think it's far better if we all focus our efforts to improve on the
PostgreSQL SPI. That way, all PL's will benefit. That's the reason I
On Sun, 2004-11-21 at 16:55 +0100, Thomas Hallgren wrote:
> In a PL language it's sometimes desirable to prevent execution of some
> commands. I would like to prevent the commands "begin [work or
> transaction]", "commit", and "rollback", completely and I would like to
> force the user to use e
Thomas Hallgren <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> In a PL language it's sometimes desirable to prevent execution of some
> commands. I would like to prevent the commands "begin [work or
> transaction]", "commit", and "rollback", completely and I would like to
> force the user to use explicit method
In a PL language it's sometimes desirable to prevent execution of some
commands. I would like to prevent the commands "begin [work or
transaction]", "commit", and "rollback", completely and I would like to
force the user to use explicit methods for the savepoint methods.
I wonder if there's an
