Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

RE: 7.1 beta 3 Linux ODBC BEGIN Behaviour

From: "Hiroshi Inoue" <Inoue(at)tpf(dot)co(dot)jp>
To: "Steve Wranovsky" <stevew(at)merge(dot)com>
Cc: "L? zl?Tibor" <ltibor(at)mail(dot)tiszanet(dot)hu>, <kataoka(at)interwiz(dot)koganei(dot)tokyo(dot)jp>, <pgsql-interfaces(at)postgresql(dot)org>, <pgsql-odbc(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: RE: 7.1 beta 3 Linux ODBC BEGIN Behaviour
Date: 2001-02-09 23:10:57
Message-ID: EKEJJICOHDIEMGPNIFIJMEPFDIAA.Inoue@tpf.co.jp (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-interfacespgsql-odbc
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Steve Wranovsky [mailto:stevew(at)merge(dot)com]
>
> I would think you when a standard SELECT is issued, you would not want to
> have a BEGIN, however, when a SELECT FOR UPDATE is issued, you may want
> to issue the BEGIN in this case.
>
> Is it easy to discriminate between these types of selects to
> decide when to
> do the begin?
>

Unfortunately no(at least for me).
The simplest solution is to simply issue BEGIN for all statements
in autocommit off mode if transaction isn't in progress.
However there are some commands(VACUUM etc) that couldn't
be executed inside transaction blocks.

Regards,
Hiroshi Inoue


In response to

pgsql-odbc by date

Next:From: Bruce MomjianDate: 2001-02-09 23:30:07
Subject: 6.2 protocol
Previous:From: Steve WranovskyDate: 2001-02-09 16:55:01
Subject: RE: 7.1 beta 3 Linux ODBC BEGIN Behaviour

pgsql-interfaces by date

Next:From: Tom LaneDate: 2001-02-10 02:47:32
Subject: Re: Plan for straightening out the include-file mess
Previous:From: Steve WranovskyDate: 2001-02-09 16:55:01
Subject: RE: 7.1 beta 3 Linux ODBC BEGIN Behaviour

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2014 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group