From: | "Hiroshi Inoue" <inoue(at)tpf(dot)co(dot)jp> |
---|---|
To: | "'Tom Lane'" <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | "'pgsql-hackers'" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: A bad behavior under autocommit off mode |
Date: | 2003-02-20 16:38:46 |
Message-ID: | 001901c2d8fe$89ddea30$0e283ddb@PbgX |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Tom Lane [mailto:tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us]
>
> Hiroshi Inoue <Inoue(at)tpf(dot)co(dot)jp> writes:
> > There seems a bad behavior under autocommit off mode.
>
> > 1) psql -c 'set autocommit to off;select 1;commit'
> > causes a WARNING: COMMIT: no transaction in progress
>
> Surely that's a bug: the SELECT ought to start a transaction block.
>
> Barry Lind reported what is probably a closely related issue:
> http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2003-01/msg00592.php
>
> I haven't gotten around to looking at this, but I suspect postgres.c
> is doing something inside the per-querytree loop that it should be
> doing outside it, or vice versa. Or possibly the problem is with
> the klugy way that we hacked autocommit-off into the xact.c state
> machine. Do you have time to look at it?
I have little time.
The transaction block state seems to be set just before returning from
the chained query. I don't know if it's bad or not.
The simplest way seems to accept COMMIT any time under autocommit
off mode.
regards,
Hiroshi Inoue
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Dave Cramer | 2003-02-20 16:49:16 | Re: request for sql3 compliance for the update command |
Previous Message | Michael Meskes | 2003-02-20 16:33:08 | Re: request for sql3 compliance for the update command |