| From: | Bèrto ëd Sèra <berto(dot)d(dot)sera(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | "pgsql-admin(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-admin(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: transaction error handling |
| Date: | 2011-11-30 08:48:39 |
| Message-ID: | CAKwGa__C8k4nCfjGHoYDCrB2MWt2k_0qPVccnEPi=AVh0-o=Rg@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-admin pgsql-bugs |
>
> On 29 November 2011 21:34, Rob Richardson <RDRichardson(at)rad-con(dot)com>
> wrote:
>
>> If Oracle saves half of the data between the beginning and ending of the
>> transaction, doesn't that defeat the purpose of the transaction?
>
>
It sure enough kills Atomicity. I can see a use for this on importing data
from external sources that may violate existing unique keys, so illegal
inserts are ignored, but you still are left without any knowledge of what
rows where silently dropped. Since when is Oracle doing this, FMI? (It's
been a long while since I used it for anything serious)
Bèrto
--
==============================
If Pac-Man had affected us as kids, we'd all be running around in a
darkened room munching pills and listening to repetitive music.
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Rudolf van der Leeden | 2011-11-30 11:55:24 | Upgrade from 9.0.5 to 9.1.1 - Problems with citext indexes |
| Previous Message | Rural Hunter | 2011-11-30 08:27:05 | Re: transaction error handling |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Nicholson, Brad (Toronto, ON, CA) | 2011-11-30 13:19:40 | Re: transaction error handling |
| Previous Message | Rural Hunter | 2011-11-30 08:27:05 | Re: transaction error handling |