| From: | Christopher Kings-Lynne <chriskl(at)familyhealth(dot)com(dot)au> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Gavin Sherry <swm(at)linuxworld(dot)com(dot)au>, "Jim C(dot) Nasby" <decibel(at)decibel(dot)org>, Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Anybody have an Oracle PL/SQL reference at hand? |
| Date: | 2004-08-04 01:46:22 |
| Message-ID: | 41103FEE.10809@familyhealth.com.au |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
> Depending on how tense you want to be about Oracle compatibility, we
> could make people actually write their blocks as above --- that is,
> the SAVEPOINT and ROLLBACK commands would be a required part of the
> exception-block syntax. They wouldn't actually *do* anything, but
> they would make the code look more like its Oracle equivalent. I'm not
> for this, but maybe someone wants to make the case for it?
So long as I can emulate SQL MERGE with it, I'm happy. ie. I need a
solution to the 'try update, if no rows changed then insert (unique
index)' common race condition issue. If I cannot keep looping that
until it succeeds, then exceptions don't help me...
Chris
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Christopher Kings-Lynne | 2004-08-04 01:50:36 | Re: pg_dump bug fixing |
| Previous Message | Bruce Momjian | 2004-08-04 01:16:50 | Re: Have you heard? It's 8.0 ... |