From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
To: Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>
Cc: Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>
Cc: PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org>
Subject: Re: pgsql: Drop unnamed portal immediately after execution to completion
Date: Mon, 10 Nov 2025 16:28:02 -0500
Message-ID: <1982325.1762810082@sss.pgh.pa.us> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CA+TgmoYFJyJNQw3RT7veO3M2BWRE9Aw4hprC5rOcawHZti-f8g@mail.gmail.com>
References: <E1vGWIt-0056al-2N@gemulon.postgresql.org>
<CA+TgmoYFJyJNQw3RT7veO3M2BWRE9Aw4hprC5rOcawHZti-f8g@mail.gmail.com>
Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> writes:
> On Wed, Nov 5, 2025 at 12:43 AM Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz> wrote:
>> Drop unnamed portal immediately after execution to completion
> This patch doesn't look well-considered to me. One problem is that
> it's a wire protocol change to fix a minor logging anomaly, which
> seems disproportionate. Another problem is that the new portal-drop
> behavior is conditional on whether XACT_FLAGS_NEEDIMMEDIATECOMMIT gets
> set, which seems unprincipled. In addition to those points, I am not
> entirely certain that the "here is no need for it beyond this point"
> comment is correct. I mean, I think it will normally be true, but what
> if the client wants to send a Describe message after-the-fact, or an
> additional Execute message that will presumably return zero rows?
Yeah, the whole idea of changing the wire-level behavior to fix this
has been making me itch: I don't believe for a moment that it won't
cause compatibility problems. I do not have a better proposal for
fixing the problem though.
regards, tom lane
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Reply to all the recipients using the --to and --cc options:
reply via email
To: pgsql-committers@postgresql.org
Cc: tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us, robertmhaas@gmail.com, michael@paquier.xyz, pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org
Subject: Re: pgsql: Drop unnamed portal immediately after execution to completion
In-Reply-To: <1982325.1762810082@sss.pgh.pa.us>
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
This inbox is served by DDX for PostgreSQL; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox