Re: Disable Transaction - plans ?

From: Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Mike Mascari <mascarm(at)mascari(dot)com>
Cc: thomas(at)pgsql(dot)com, Doug McNaught <doug(at)wireboard(dot)com>, "Dominic J(dot) Eidson" <sauron(at)the-infinite(dot)org>, Ben-Nes Michael <miki(at)canaan(dot)co(dot)il>, pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Disable Transaction - plans ?
Date: 2001-10-25 00:58:06
Message-ID: 200110250058.f9P0w7q14851@candle.pha.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general

> In fact, some could argue that the default behavior of PostgreSQL
> should be changed (or at least have an option) to behave like
> Oracle, where a transaction is implicitly begun at the first
> encounter of an INSERT/UPDATE/DELETE - or in PostgreSQL's case, the
> first submitted statement. That would make PostgreSQL behave much
> better out-of-the-box in comparison to mySQL, and would satiate the
> desires of those Oracle folks transitioning to PostgreSQL that do a:
>
> DELETE FROM foo;
> -- Nuts!
> ROLLBACK;
>
> and expect their DELETE to be undone.

TODO has:

* Allow autocommit so always in a transaction block

--
Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us
pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us | (610) 853-3000
+ If your life is a hard drive, | 830 Blythe Avenue
+ Christ can be your backup. | Drexel Hill, Pennsylvania 19026

In response to

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Mike Mascari 2001-10-25 01:14:09 Re: Disable Transaction - plans ?
Previous Message Tom Lane 2001-10-25 00:52:26 Re: Disable Transaction - plans ?