Re: Portals and nested transactions

From: "Zeugswetter Andreas SB SD" <ZeugswetterA(at)spardat(dot)at>
To: "Tom Lane" <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, "Alvaro Herrera" <alvherre(at)dcc(dot)uchile(dot)cl>
Cc: <pgsql-hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Portals and nested transactions
Date: 2004-07-14 15:17:43
Message-ID: 46C15C39FEB2C44BA555E356FBCD6FA40184D148@m0114.s-mxs.net
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers


My answers:

> Q1: Should Portals successfully created within the failed subxact
> be closed? Or should they remain open?

no for protocol level

I can understand a yes to this one for sql level, because it will be
hard to clean up by hand :-( But I like the analogy to hold cursors,
so I would also say no to sql level.

Is the pro yes argument ACID allowed here ? I thought ACID is about
data integrity and not flow control, and also deals with main transactions
and not subtransactions.

> Q2: If the subxact changed the state of a pre-existing Portal, should
> that state change roll back? In particular, can a Close Portal
> operation roll back?

NO for both SQL and protocol level.
The analogy is imho that closing a 'hold cursor' is also never rolled back

> How to do it non-transactionally
> --------------------------------

Sounds like a good plan, but also sounds like a lot of work.

Andreas

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Andreas Pflug 2004-07-14 15:29:57 Re: Release planning
Previous Message Andreas Pflug 2004-07-14 15:04:02 Re: serverlog rotation/functions