Re: autocommit vs TRUNCATE et al

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: autocommit vs TRUNCATE et al
Date: 2002-10-21 22:46:37
Message-ID: 10270.1035240397@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> writes:
> Tom Lane wrote:
>> Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> writes:
>>> Maybe we can throw a WARNING when autocommit is on. Would that make
>>> everyone happy?
>>
>> I doubt it, because by the time you read the WARNING it's too late:
>> the statement's already committed.

> I assume the same limitation would hold for VACUUM, right, that you have
> to turn on autocommit mode to use it?

Yeah, it would, unless we wanted to throw in some additional hack to
distinguish VACUUM from the "more dangerous" cases.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Justin Clift 2002-10-21 23:05:19 German version of the PostgreSQL "Advocacy and Marketing" site is ready
Previous Message Bruce Momjian 2002-10-21 22:39:51 Re: autocommit vs TRUNCATE et al