Re: Performance question: Commit or rollback?

From: Chris Angelico <rosuav(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: vinny <vinny(at)xs4all(dot)nl>
Cc: pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Performance question: Commit or rollback?
Date: 2011-12-24 12:49:59
Message-ID: CAPTjJmovDdvBygSUCZTM=XeH8Xn9nff1Hk+0BEyGZxrOqsQb0Q@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general

On Sat, Dec 24, 2011 at 11:46 PM, vinny <vinny(at)xs4all(dot)nl> wrote:
> The actual rollback won't hurt as long as you have not made any
> modificatons to any records. But opening the transaction could have side
> effects for other processes that want to modiy the records that you want
> to protect in your read-only transaction.
>
> How about using a databaseuser that has it's create/update/delete rights
> revoked? That will cause an error if the supposedly read-only routine
> does try to change data.

The readonly-ness of the session is defined based on information
stored in the database, so that would entail the cost of
re-authenticating. Also, we want to minimize debugging time by having
both read-only and read-write access use almost exactly the same code
and DB access, meaning that we should not need to test every module in
every mode.

ChrisA

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Shankar Palaniappan 2011-12-24 12:54:04 Re: Unable to connect to PostgreSQL server : Could not get socket error status
Previous Message vinny 2011-12-24 12:46:29 Re: Performance question: Commit or rollback?