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

Vote on SET in aborted transaction

From: Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org>
Subject: Vote on SET in aborted transaction
Date: 2002-04-23 16:27:31
Message-ID: 200204231627.g3NGRVq11398@candle.pha.pa.us (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers
OK, would people please vote on how to handle SET in an aborted
transaction?  This vote will allow us to resolve the issue and move
forward if needed.

In the case of:

	SET x=1;
	BEGIN;
	SET x=2;
	query_that_aborts_transaction;
	SET x=3;
	COMMIT;

at the end, should 'x' equal:
	
	1 - All SETs are rolled back in aborted transaction
	2 - SETs are ignored after transaction abort
	3 - All SETs are honored in aborted transaction
	? - Have SETs vary in behavior depending on variable

Our current behavior is 2.

Please vote and I will tally the results.

-- 
  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

Responses

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Jean-Paul ARGUDODate: 2002-04-23 16:40:23
Subject: Re: cvs update, configure, make, error in bootstrap.* ?...
Previous:From: Bruce MomjianDate: 2002-04-23 16:19:21
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] WITH DELIMITERS in COPY

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