Re: do I need a rollback() after commit that fails?

From: Alban Hertroys <dalroi(at)solfertje(dot)student(dot)utwente(dot)nl>
To: Vick Khera <vivek(at)khera(dot)org>
Cc: Andy Colson <andy(at)squeakycode(dot)net>, PostgreSQL <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: do I need a rollback() after commit that fails?
Date: 2009-09-30 13:02:15
Message-ID: 8D097E1C-0720-413A-866A-929B099D204D@solfertje.student.utwente.nl
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general

On 30 Sep 2009, at 4:01, Vick Khera wrote:

> The question still stands: if the COMMIT fails, ROLLBACK is not
> required in Postgres. Is this portable to other databases?

I don't think so. I recall messages on this list claiming that some
databases (MS SQL, MySQL if memory serves me) commit the queries up to
the failed query anyway if you issue a COMMIT (which is just wrong!),
so the commit succeeds and there's nothing to rollback after that.
Some searching should turn up those messages, if I recall correctly
the issue at hand was that people expected that behaviour in Postgres
too.

But I don't know what Perl DBI does internally when issuing $dbh-
>commit(), maybe it's taking such things into account already.

Alban Hertroys

--
Screwing up is the best way to attach something to the ceiling.

!DSPAM:737,4ac356da11681178911724!

In response to

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Thomas Jacob 2009-09-30 13:30:15 Updating row with updating function, bug or feature?
Previous Message Sydney Puente 2009-09-30 12:42:17 ms-sql -> pg 8.x