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

Re: MySQL and PostgreSQL speed compare

From: Jens Hartwig <jhartwig(at)debis(dot)com>
To: PostgreSQL General <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: MySQL and PostgreSQL speed compare
Date: 2000-12-29 12:54:17
Message-ID: 3A4C8979.CB9C7C9A@debis.com (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general
Hello,

one possible behaviour would be to rollback the transaction to the last
savepoint, which was set before the current statement (not the
transaction!) began. In this case I could commit all changes which have
passed without an error. I think, this is the default case in Oracle -
is this compliant with the SQL-standard?

Regards, Jens

Frank Joerdens schrieb:
> 
> Jarmo Paavilainen wrote:
> [ . . . ]
> > "PostgreSQL*" is postgres whith queries inside transactions. But as long as
> > transactions are broken in PostgreSQL you cant use them in real life (if a
> > query fails inside a transactions block, PostgreSQL "RollBack"s the whole
> > transaction block, and thats broken. You can not convince me of anything
> > else).
> 
> What do you think _should_ happen when a query fails inside a transaction block? (I am not
> trying to convince you of anything, just being curious.)
> 
> Regards,
> 
> Frank

=============================================
Jens Hartwig
---------------------------------------------
debis Systemhaus GEI mbH
10875 Berlin
Tel.     : +49 (0)30 2554-3282
Fax      : +49 (0)30 2554-3187
Mobil    : +49 (0)170 167-2648
E-Mail   : jhartwig(at)debis(dot)com
=============================================

In response to

pgsql-general by date

Next:From: JarekDate: 2000-12-29 12:58:58
Subject: Help in JDBC
Previous:From: Alfred PerlsteinDate: 2000-12-29 12:50:57
Subject: Re: MySQL and PostgreSQL speed compare

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