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

RE: [INTERFACES] 7.1 beta 3 Linux ODBC BEGIN Behaviour

From: László Tibor <ltibor(at)mail(dot)tiszanet(dot)hu>
To: "pgsql-odbc" <pgsql-odbc(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: RE: [INTERFACES] 7.1 beta 3 Linux ODBC BEGIN Behaviour
Date: 2001-02-10 18:15:56
Message-ID: NEBBJDDFALKDHFBLCGCPIEBFCAAA.ltibor@mail.tiszanet.hu (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-interfacespgsql-odbc
> It'd be nice if ODBC could distinguish SELECT FOR UPDATE from plain
> SELECT, but in practice it cannot reliably do so.  Doubtless we could
> extend ODBC to look for "FOR UPDATE" in the text of the query, but
> that will only catch simple situations.  Consider these possibilities:
> 
> * A view or rule invoked by the query uses FOR UPDATE.  (Pre-7.1, we
> didn't support FOR UPDATE in views ... but we do now.)
> 
> * A function invoked by the query does SELECT FOR UPDATE internally.
> 
> For that matter, it's quite possible for a function invoked by a SELECT
> to do INSERT/UPDATE/DELETE internally.  Therefore, it's impossible for
> the ODBC driver to reliably distinguish a pure SELECT from a SELECT that
> causes locking or even data updates.
> 
> Given these considerations, I think it's a mistake for ODBC to treat
> SELECT differently from other queries for the purpose of setting
> transaction boundaries.
> 
> 			regards, tom lane

Thank you Tom. I agree. Regards, Tibor

Tibor Laszlo
ltibor(at)mail(dot)tiszanet(dot)hu

In response to

pgsql-odbc by date

Next:From: Nick GorhamDate: 2001-02-10 18:25:27
Subject: Re: [PATCHES] Fix for ODBC close
Previous:From: Peter EisentrautDate: 2001-02-10 18:09:23
Subject: Re: Re: [PATCHES] Fix for ODBC close

pgsql-interfaces by date

Next:From: Hiroshi InoueDate: 2001-02-10 21:37:02
Subject: RE: 7.1 beta 3 Linux ODBC BEGIN Behaviour
Previous:From: Tom LaneDate: 2001-02-10 17:30:45
Subject: Re: 7.1 beta 3 Linux ODBC BEGIN Behaviour

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