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

Re: autonomous transactions

From: "Jonah H(dot) Harris" <jonah(dot)harris(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: "Gokulakannan Somasundaram" <gokul007(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: "Alvaro Herrera" <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com>, "Gregory Stark" <stark(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, "Neil Conway" <neilc(at)samurai(dot)com>, "Pavel Stehule" <pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com>, "Roberts, Jon" <Jon(dot)Roberts(at)asurion(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: autonomous transactions
Date: 2008-01-24 03:35:22
Message-ID: 36e682920801231935i58a56674s8621d738f7fcb438@mail.gmail.com (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers
On Jan 23, 2008 10:06 PM, Gokulakannan Somasundaram <gokul007(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> On Jan 24, 2008 2:46 AM, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com> wrote:
> > > The Audit transaction, which is a autonomous transaction need not catch
> any
> > > error and resume the outer transaction.
> >
> > What if the logging fails, say because you forgot to create the audit
> > table?
> >
> I get it now...

Autonomous transactions are, umm, autonomous.  The calling transaction
doesn't know about or care whether the autonomous transaction succeeds
or fails for any reason.

-- 
Jonah H. Harris, Sr. Software Architect | phone: 732.331.1324
EnterpriseDB Corporation                | fax: 732.331.1301
499 Thornall Street, 2nd Floor          | jonah(dot)harris(at)enterprisedb(dot)com
Edison, NJ 08837                        | http://www.enterprisedb.com/

In response to

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: WesDate: 2008-01-24 16:41:46
Subject: REINDEX on large DB vs. DROP INDEX/CREATE INDEX
Previous:From: Gokulakannan SomasundaramDate: 2008-01-24 03:06:56
Subject: Re: autonomous transactions

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