Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: Automatic transactions in psql

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>
Cc: Greg Sabino Mullane <greg(at)turnstep(dot)com>, pgsql-patches(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Automatic transactions in psql
Date: 2002-02-07 18:40:34
Message-ID: 14614.1013107234@sss.pgh.pa.us (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackerspgsql-patches
Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> writes:
> This is an interesting idea, although you may want to give the user the
> option to customize his prompt.

Seems cool.  I am a bit worried about whether the transaction-block
detection mechanism is reliable, though.  We might need to add something
to the FE/BE protocol to make this work correctly.

>> Secondly, it adds a "begin transaction" option that, when
>> enabled, ensures that you are always inside a transaction
>> while in psql, so you can always rollback.

> This should be done in the backend.

Agreed.  If I recall recent discussions correctly, the spec says that
certain SQL commands should open a transaction and others should not.
It's not reasonable to have that logic in psql rather than the backend.

			regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Hannu KrosingDate: 2002-02-07 18:40:53
Subject: Re: Threaded PosgreSQL server
Previous:From: Tom LaneDate: 2002-02-07 17:58:50
Subject: Re: Suggestions for 7.3 date handling

pgsql-patches by date

Next:From: Tom LaneDate: 2002-02-07 19:05:35
Subject: Re: contrib/pg_filedump - PostgreSQL File Dump Utility
Previous:From: Patrick MacdonaldDate: 2002-02-07 14:59:17
Subject: Re: contrib/pg_filedump - PostgreSQL File Dump Utility

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2014 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group