Re: SET autocommit begins transaction?

From: Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Sean Chittenden <sean(at)chittenden(dot)org>
Cc: pgsql-bugs(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: SET autocommit begins transaction?
Date: 2002-09-18 21:59:14
Message-ID: 200209182159.g8ILxE010566@candle.pha.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-bugs

Sean Chittenden wrote:
> > > > Well there is discussion on whether a SET with autocommit off should
> > > > start a transaction if it is the first command. Right now it does, and
> > > > clearly you have a case where it acts strangely.
> > >
> > > Problem is that through various DB APIs such as DBI, you can't
> > > garuntee to the user doing development that that it's the 1st command
> > > that they're performing.
> >
> > OK, but why does my suggestion not work:
> >
> > SET autocommit = ON;
> > COMMIT;
>
> Hrm... if I changed the DBI layer for Ruby to have:
>
> db['AutoCommit'] = true
>
> use 'SET autocommit = ON; COMMIT;' I think I'd be breaking tons of
> applications where they wouldn't be expecting the commit.

Actually, the current approved way is:

BEGIN; SET autocommit = ON; COMMIT;

--
Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us
pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us | (610) 359-1001
+ If your life is a hard drive, | 13 Roberts Road
+ Christ can be your backup. | Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-bugs by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Sean Chittenden 2002-09-18 22:02:22 Re: SET autocommit begins transaction?
Previous Message Sean Chittenden 2002-09-18 21:57:34 Re: SET autocommit begins transaction?