Re: Nested Transactions, Abort All

From: Mike Benoit <ipso(at)snappymail(dot)ca>
To: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)dcc(dot)uchile(dot)cl>
Cc: Thomas Swan <tswan(at)idigx(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Nested Transactions, Abort All
Date: 2004-07-01 23:47:09
Message-ID: 1088725629.31430.89.camel@ipso.snappymail.ca
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Thu, 2004-07-01 at 18:38 -0400, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 01, 2004 at 02:01:37PM -0500, Thomas Swan wrote:
> > Is there going to be an option to abort the complete transaction without
> > knowing how deep you are? Perhaps something like "ABORT ALL".
> >
> > The reason I suggest this, is that I can foresee an application or user
> > leaving nested transactions open inadvertently, or not knowing how
> > deeply nested they are when they are called. It's just a thought, and I
> > didn't recall any mention of something like it on the list.
>
> If we change the syntax, say by using SUBCOMMIT/SUBABORT for
> subtransactions, then using a simple ABORT would abort the whole
> transaction tree.
>

But then we're back to the application having to know if its in a
regular transaction or a sub-transaction aren't we? To me that sounds
just as bad.

"ABORT ALL" sure would be nice.

--
Mike Benoit <ipso(at)snappymail(dot)ca>

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Steve Holdoway 2004-07-02 00:24:23 transactions within functions
Previous Message Mark Wu 2004-07-01 23:38:19 working on support triggers on columns