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

Transactions in 7.0 (was RE: [INTERFACES] Re: ODBC and Large Objects, FAQ not working)

From: Peter Mount <petermount(at)it(dot)maidstone(dot)gov(dot)uk>
To: pgsql-interfaces(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Transactions in 7.0 (was RE: [INTERFACES] Re: ODBC and Large Objects, FAQ not working)
Date: 1999-12-08 08:58:01
Message-ID: 1B3D5E532D18D311861A00600865478C70BF1D@exchange1.nt.maidstone.gov.uk (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-interfaces
> Reason of this problem is that PsqlODBC handles the large object
without
> transaction.  Since PostgreSQL 6.5, the large object must be handled
in
> transaction.
> 
> To solve, we should insert source code to begin transaction into
PsqlODBC
> source before calling lo_create and lo_open functions.  Also should
commit
> transaction after calling lo_close too.

What is the possible side effects of not committing after lo_close? I'm
just wondering, incase I have to do anything to the JDBC driver's lo
support.

Whilst on the subject, what is the prospect of nested transactions for
7.0? My number 1 question I get asked is caused by having to use
transactions for lo's, and it would be nice to wrap the JDBC standard lo
calls in their own transactions, but if autoCommit is false (ie, already
in a transaction), then this is a problem.

Nestable transactions (even only 1 extra level) would solve this
problem.

Peter

-- 
Peter Mount
Enterprise Support
Maidstone Borough Council
Any views stated are my own, and not those of Maidstone Borough Council.


pgsql-interfaces by date

Next:From: Tom LaneDate: 1999-12-08 09:07:17
Subject: Re: [INTERFACES] Transaction support in 6.5.3/JDBC
Previous:From: Christian HangDate: 1999-12-08 08:47:05
Subject: Re: ODBC and Large Objects, FAQ not working

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